Martin Kraemer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 08:05:03AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> >
> > So maybe it avoids a segfault, but now we have a configured listening
> > socket we won't wake up for. Which is worse? Perhaps segfault is
> > better? (actually, I'd rather us report the error and terminate)
>
> Flame bait: assert(fd >= 0); ...
or bail out in make_sock() like other errors (if it is an error, of
course; I still don't understand)
> Hmmm... Perhaps we should ask the authors of mod_ssl and KAME.
You committed it, Martin; I'm asking you what problem it solves :)
(I saw a similar change with no comments in the mod_ssl patch; I
didn't see it in the KAME patch I have (for Apache 1.3.6).)
I'll ask Ralf.
--
Jeff Trawick | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
