I though that shutdown acts as below: ------ Syntax: int shutdown(int sockfd, int howto); returns 0 if OK, -1 on error.
Action of the function depends on the value of howto - SHUT_RD - read half of the connection is closed. The data currently in the socket receive buffer is discarded. SHUT_WR - write half of the connection is closed. The data in the socket send buffer is sent followed by the normal TCP connection termination sequence. SHUT_RDWR - both read and write halves of the connection are closed. ------ ( from http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:B6qVFvpm-p4C:www.ncst.ernet.in/~netfac/PGDI T/ppt/IOmultiplex.ppt+Unix+socket+programming+shutdown+SHUT_WR&hl=en&ie=UTF8) SUSv2 is annoyingly somewhat vague on the specifics. Perhaps you were thinking of SHUT_RD as discarding data? My patch used only SHUT_WR, so it should be safe unless the above is totally wrong. I've just done a quick test with my patch on Linux, and didn't see any problem. Max. Martin Pool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From memory, "Practical TCP Programming" says that this behaviour is > caused by a misunderstanding of the sockets API by the WinSock > programmers. The correct meaning of shutdown() on Unix is to throw > away any outstanding data and close the socket immediately. Normally, > when you close a socket, you do want to let any pending data get > across, so it's rarely used. > > On Windows shutdown() does not throw away data, and should be called. > (Trust M$ to get it backwards and force everybody else to adapt.) > > So the patch cannot go in as is, because I think it will break Unix. > Something like it can go in, #ifdefed for W32.
smime.p7s
Description: application/pkcs7-signature
