>On 12/02/2014 00:15, Ted Unangst wrote: >> I think the patch is broken though. It should add a close() if !kflag. > >Attaching an updated patch that fixes the problem minimally for -l. >However, as I noted before, the code there has some redundant logic of >closing the listening socket under different options, when closing >should be purely based on -k.
How many usage cases have you tested? All of them? The standard is high. Rise to it.
