netdev - Re: [Bug 106241] New: shutdown(3)/close(3) behaviour is incorrect for sockets in accept(3)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1445610118.22974.153.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Fri, 23 Oct 2015 07:21:58 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Alan Burlison <Alan.Burlison@...cle.com>
Cc:	Casper.Dik@...cle.com, Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, stephen@...workplumber.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, dholland-tech@...bsd.org
Subject: Re: [Bug 106241] New: shutdown(3)/close(3) behaviour is incorrect
 for sockets in accept(3)

On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 14:35 +0100, Alan Burlison wrote:

> If you think it's a POSIX deficiency then logging a DR is probably the 
> correct way of addressing that. And as I've said it's fine to decide 
> that you don't care about what POSIX says on the subject but you can't 
> simultaneously claim POSIX conformance. One or the other, not both.

I claim nothing. If you believe a man page should be fixed, please send
a patch to man page maintainer.

Have you tested the patch I sent ?

The goal here is to improve things, not to say you are right or I am
right. I am very often wrong, then what ?

This list is about linux kernel development.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html