http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17316
Summary: ncalrpc is using named pipes not lrpc Product: Wine Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: rpc AssignedTo: wine-bugs@winehq.org ReportedBy: lkcl@lkcl.net
in testing and developing message-mode named pipes, progress is hampered by the use of named pipes for lrpc in rpcrt4. i encountered a comment saying "lrpc should be used, here, but for now named pipes are used".
... please could we have lrpc? :)
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17316
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton lkcl@lkcl.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |17195
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17316
--- Comment #1 from Rob Shearman robertshearman@gmail.com 2009-02-08 17:15:14 --- It shouldn't matter what transport is used for LRPC, since it is internal to the machine. In theory, it could use UNIX domain sockets instead, but it may be necessary to be able to access the security information of the client (it is currently stubbed) in server code, and so it seems best to keep the implementation as using named pipes so that the work only has to be done once rather than twice.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17316
Rob Shearman robertshearman@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |robertshearman@gmail.com
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17316
Juan Lang juan_lang@yahoo.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Juan Lang juan_lang@yahoo.com 2009-02-09 11:45:23 --- The reason we don't use LPC for ncalrpc is that it isn't implemented in Wine. Rob's also correct that it shouldn't matter what transport is used, so if you want to separate RPC from other named pipe use for debugging, you might want to switch to using ncacn_ip_tcp in your own tree.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17316
--- Comment #3 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton lkcl@lkcl.net 2009-02-09 14:11:36 --- ahh, of course. good point. thanks.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17316
Rob Shearman robertshearman@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX
--- Comment #4 from Rob Shearman robertshearman@gmail.com 2009-03-08 05:46:20 --- Not application-visible, so marking this bug as WONTFIX.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17316
Vitaliy Margolen vitaliy@kievinfo.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
--- Comment #5 from Vitaliy Margolen vitaliy@kievinfo.com 2009-03-08 11:51:51 --- Closing