From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Sep 15 11:54:58 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA16595
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 15 Sep 1997 11:54:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell.firehouse.net (brian@shell.firehouse.net [209.42.203.45])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16590
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 15 Sep 1997 11:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (brian@localhost)
	by shell.firehouse.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA02189;
	Mon, 15 Sep 1997 14:54:18 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 14:54:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brian Mitchell <brian@firehouse.net>
To: Sunthiti Patchararungruang <stt@casper.cpe.ku.ac.th>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Problem about BPF
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970916010431.16587A-100000@casper.cpe.ku.ac.th>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.95.970915145328.2172A-100000@shell.firehouse.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 16 Sep 1997, Sunthiti Patchararungruang wrote:

> Dear every body,
> 
> 	If I want to send a frame to a BPF device, can I use more than one
> "write" commands to complete all fields of a packet? (i.e. first write for
> ether_header and another write for IP packet).

to the best of my knowledge, no. I believe it sends the packet out without
really looking at it/determining if it is full or not.