> On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, Steve Legg wrote: > > > Am I wrong, and there is actually a way for reqPTY_state to be set > > back to idle? Or is this a real bug? > > It looks like a real bug to me!
Cool, thought so. > > (it looks to me like the code has been written with asynchrony in > > mind, but never actually finished - the reqPTY_state code appears to > > be mostly redundant). > > Not entirely redundant since it avoids doing all that initing of the > packet during situations when the transport layer returns > LIBSSH2_ERROR_EAGAIN. Ah yes, I didn't notice the BLOCK_ADJUST macro. I see how it works now (or is supposed to work except in this case ;) > How about fixing this bug with a patch like the attached? Looks good to me - I'll give that a go later (I'm using it for an Android project and building libssh2 means a trip through Linux for me [too hard to get libssh2/openssl building with the android toolchain under windows ;] so I'll give it a go tomorrow probably). Thanks! Steve. _______________________________________________ libssh2-devel http://cool.haxx.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libssh2-devel
