> On 12/01/2014 21:32, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> >> Do you have any particular and practically important failing scenario in
> >> >mind?
> > Millions of users other than you.
>
> I am trying to fix the bug, and it is not my intention to get into the
> pissing match, nor I have time for that in my schedule.
It appears to be working as intended, as the comment says.
/* Allow only one connection at a time, but stay alive. */
I think it is pretty clear you are too short of time to study the code.
> >> >The change in only for AF_INET, and only the move of
> >> >close(listen_socket) up, which was closed after work, and now is closed
> >> >before work.
> > Only for AF_INET, you mean, the most common case?
>
> That wasn't the point.
>
> Once again: do you have any practically important failing scenario?
The onus is on you to prove that there are no regressions from what
you suggest. So, if you don't have time in your schedule to do so,
uhm, kindly bugger off?
But please don't start a pissing match, Yuri. You don't have time for
that.
