Status Query - Please respond - Re: Patch to avoid 'Connection reset by peer' error for rsync on cygwin
dwd at bell-labs.com
Fri May 10 07:19:04 EST 2002
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 04:22:45PM -0700, Martin Pool wrote:
> On 9 May 2002, Dave Dykstra <dwd at bell-labs.com> wrote:
> > The answer has to come from Martin and I haven't seen anything posted
> > from him lately, he must be unavailable.
> Sorry, I've been out of town this week.
> > On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 03:28:06PM +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > On the one hand, I don't want to annoy anyone with repeated emails :-), but on
> > > the other, I would like to know the chances of the patch making it in to 2.5.6.
> > >
> > > Even if the answer is 'Maybe - too busy to think about it right now', I will be
> > > satisfied, but if I need to revise it before it can be considered, I would like
> > > to know that.
> This is the shutdown one, right? I wanted to check about portability
> before we put it in. Snader's "Effective TCP/IP Programming" says that
> shutdown(fd, 1);
> is OK on both Unix and Windows and will avoid errors from closing the
> socket. So I think it's OK to put it in. Winsock misinterprets other
> values of the second parameter so we can't use them.
> I don't understand why you need to only insert this call here and
> not in every case where a socket is closed. If there's no specific
> reason we should have a common shutdownsocket() routine and call it;
> if there is a reason we should document it.
I think it might be too risky for 2.5.6 and perhaps should wait to 2.6.0.
More information about the rsync