Bug#457174: FD_SETSIZE
Loic's patch is not so about the *number* of file descriptors but about the *largest* file descriptor that can be used in netcat. The previous behaviour (FD_SETSIZE set to 16) only allows for file descriptors numbered from 0 to 15. If netcat is forked from a program which already use those, it will break because the new FD it obtains are too high. About the concern on too many opened file descriptors: this is not a program's job to take care of this, other OS-provided mechanisms such as ulimit already do. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#457174: FD_SETSIZE
Excerpts from Samuel Tardieu's message of Mon Oct 13 04:29:55 -0400 2008: Loic's patch is not so about the *number* of file descriptors but about the *largest* file descriptor that can be used in netcat. Yes, I know how select(2) works; since its usage was fixed in the other patch, I don't see why this check should be changed to some just-as-arbitrary number rather than simply eliminated. If I don't get an explanation from Loic, I'm just going to remove it at some point. -- things change. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#457174: FD_SETSIZE
* Decklin Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-10-13 17:46:59 -0400] | Excerpts from Samuel Tardieu's message of Mon Oct 13 04:29:55 -0400 2008: | | Loic's patch is not so about the *number* of file descriptors | but about the *largest* file descriptor that can be used in | netcat. | | Yes, I know how select(2) works; since its usage was fixed in the | other patch, I don't see why this check should be changed to some | just-as-arbitrary number rather than simply eliminated. If I don't get | an explanation from Loic, I'm just going to remove it at some point. Agreed, it should be eliminated and the system default should be kept. Anyway, I withdraw my request, we switched to socat today after I had a look at the netcat code, and it fits its job perfectly, so we won't be using netcat anymore. PS/ I think Loic dropped the ball, he is with another company now, so it is unlikely that you hear from him about this report -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#457174: FD_SETSIZE
Excerpts from Samuel Tardieu's message of Mon Oct 13 18:13:08 -0400 2008: Agreed, it should be eliminated and the system default should be kept. Anyway, I withdraw my request, we switched to socat today after I had a look at the netcat code, and it fits its job perfectly, so we won't be using netcat anymore. No problem. If you have any issues with socat's interface being different, I'd recommend netcat-openbsd over sticking with netcat. The code is much improved. -- things change. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
