Re: [Chicken-hackers] Problem with OpenSSL and file descriptors (sendfile)

[Peter Bex]

On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 01:03:27AM +0200, Felix wrote:
> So... You could use the "reserved" fields (you actually *should* use
> the "port-data", but some silly implementor (me) has already broken
> this convention), so you could use the "reserved" fields of the port
> (see around line 1630 in library.scm) to store whatever you want, just
> make sure both tcp.scm and openssl.scm agree on their use.  The
> port-type (whether it refers to a socket or not, which is possible
> what you need as well) is in slot #7.
> 
> Hm. It would probably be a good idea to use symbolic names instead of
> slot numbers. On the other hand, this is just too low-level anyway, so
> you deserve nothing better. ssl-make-i/o-ports should simply not
> modify the port-data. Very bad. Verboten. Absolutely.

haha, thanks for clarifying :)

Here's a patch that uses the reserved slots to store the tcp ports,
which can then be used to pass to tcp-addresses.  This makes Spiffy's
HTTPS work properly.  Are you okay with this, Thomas?

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
                                                        -- Donald Knuth

openssl-port-dehackery.patch
Description: Text document