On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 02:13:19PM +0100, Guido Trotter wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Iustin Pop <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 01:34:36PM +0100, Michael Hanselmann wrote: > >> The first can be problematic if poll(2) returns POLLHUP|POLLERR on a > >> socket. Before it would be only be respected for SOCKOP_RECV, but since > >> they can also occur on other socket operations, esp. in combination with > >> OpenSSL, letting the socket functions handle POLLHUP|POLLERR seems to be > >> the right thing. > >> > >> The second is a typo leading to an endless loop if the first line of an > >> HTTP connection is empty (simply "\r\n"). Instead of removing the empty > >> line, it would remove anything after it. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Michael Hanselmann <[email protected]> > > > > LGTM. > > Should these be in stable-2.1?
Yes, but as you said offline, there are some conflicts. I'd say cherry-pick these to stable-2.1, and merge into devel-2.1... iustin
