From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,85adbf2c85d62e36
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-11-02 10:25:41 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!attbi_s52.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Jeff C," <nolongersafeto@userealemailsniff.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <pan.2003.11.02.04.50.31.80921.3898@nospam.net>
 <pan.2003.11.02.06.38.28.506509@free.fr> <Hz7pb.65795$9E1.276588@attbi_s52>
 <pan.2003.11.02.18.03.46.69238.853@nospam.net>
Subject: Re: More Florist.
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID: <D_bpb.67113$9E1.283392@attbi_s52>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.34.215.119
X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net
X-Trace: attbi_s52 1067797539 24.34.215.119 (Sun, 02 Nov 2003 18:25:39 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 18:25:39 GMT
Organization: Comcast Online
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 18:25:39 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1930
Date: 2003-11-02T18:25:39+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Freejack" <user@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.11.02.18.03.46.69238.853@nospam.net...
> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 08:23:51 -0500, Jeff C, wrote:
>
>
>
> > Have you tried something like
> >
> > My_Storage : aliased Database_Array(1 .. 255);
> >
> > begin
> >  XXX := Get_Network_Info_By_Name(Name =>
> >  The_Name_You_Already_Figured_Out,
> >                                                               Storage =>
> > My_Storage'unchecked_access);
> > end;
> >
> > ....or something along those lines...
>
>
> Alright...here's what I have so far. Still getting Storage_Error. NetDB
> is the only place I get it.(Why isn't there a simple "Get_Host_By_Name"
> function? It's the most commonly used NetDB function. Why does one have
> to parse the thing out of the response generated from the
> "Get_Network_Info_By_Name" function? A design flaw?)
> All my other procedures work so far. This is the only one that's
> chaffing.

Well..It is following the POSIX standard so if there is a problem it is in
the standard and (probably) not the
implementation.

Up until now we (I) have been answering your question directly without
knowing what your final goals are.
Perhaps you would be happier using the AdaSockets. I find it a lot easier to
use and more "Ada like" v.s. the
POSIX binding.

http://www.rfc1149.net/devel/adasockets

Of course if there is some reason you have to use florist then this is not
the right choice.