On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 08:07:04AM -0700, David Schwartz wrote: > > Yes, and additionally, there may be implementations supporting a > > select function but at the same time not even conforming the > > standard, I think such `TCP stacks' exist. > > BTW, which standard would it be, `4.4BSD'? > > I'm talking about The Single Unix Specification or The Open Group Base > Specification. > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/FD_SET.html > This is reasonably clear that 'select' reports current status, just as > functions like 'stat' do. They provide no more of a future guarantee than > functions like 'stat' do.
Actually, this page says: "A descriptor shall be considered ready for reading when a call to an input function with O_NONBLOCK clear would not block, whether or not the function would transfer data successfully." Is that not to say that if select() says it's ready to read, I'm guaranteed my next read() won't block? I notice the 'would not block' instead of 'will not block'. That makes me uneasy. Y. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
