On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Elliott Slaughter <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:elliottslaughter@gmail.com">elliottslaughter@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Hans Hübner <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:hans.huebner@gmail.com" target="_blank">hans.huebner@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Elliott,<br>
<br>
to my knowledge, usocket does not provide an API to get a list of all<br>
network interfaces, which is what you need to do if you want to know<br>
the local IP address(es).<br>
<br>
One quick workaround is to invoke ifconfig and parse the output.  I<br>
know that this is not a very satisfying or portable approach, but it<br>
is quick.<br></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Thanks. I wanted to make sure I wasn&#39;t missing something.</div></div></blockquote></div><div><br></div><div>Wait -- what about the following?</div><div><br></div><div>
<div>* (usocket::get-hosts-by-name (usocket::get-host-name))</div><div><br></div><div>(#(192 168 1 100) #(5 223 109 11) #(192 168 56 1))</div><div><br></div><div>I know these functions aren&#39;t exported from usocket, but is there any reason why they couldn&#39;t be?</div>
</div><br>-- <br>Elliott Slaughter<br><br>&quot;Don&#39;t worry about what anybody else is going to do. The best way to predict the future is to invent it.&quot; - Alan Kay<br>