On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Leo Bicknell wrote: >In a message written on Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 12:55:15PM -0700, Crist J. Clark wrote: >> This is a feature not a bug since it is documented in inet_aton(3), >> >> All numbers supplied as ``parts'' in a `.' notation may be decimal, >> octal, or hexadecimal, as specified in the C language (i.e., a leading 0x >> or 0X implies hexadecimal; otherwise, a leading 0 implies octal; other- >> wise, the number is interpreted as decimal). > >While I agree it's documented, does it agree with practice? > >The earliest reference I could find was RFC 952 >(ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc952.txt):
It agrees with the SUS definition of inet_addr(), and inet_aton() should probably be consistent with that: http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/functions/inet_addr.html Ian To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
