Re: BSD Accept filters

2001-07-13 Thread Dirk-Willem van Gulik
another 1.3 tree. I didn't commit to 2.0, because I forgot. :-( The problem is that we are checking for the wrong errno when the setsockopt fails. The errno we check for should never be returned by setsockopt. If we change the errno to the correct one (I have to look at my patch), Hmm

BSD Accept filters

2001-07-10 Thread Dirk-Willem van Gulik
I am getting more than a bit anoyed by the BSD accept filters; when you have them in a binary; they are always on. And if the setsockopt() fails things bomb wiht an exit(1). Which is a bit of a pain if you move them between machines and/or have kernels which (sometimes) do not have them plugged

Re: BSD Accept filters

2001-07-10 Thread dean gaudet
On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote: 0 Change the 'exit' when the sockopt fails for SO_ACCEPTFILTER to a warning;. 1 Leave as is; but provide an AcceptFilter on/off directive to switch it off - if SO_ACCPETFILTER is defined. 2.Have AcceptFitler on/off

Re: BSD Accept filters

2001-07-10 Thread rbb
On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote: I am getting more than a bit anoyed by the BSD accept filters; when you have them in a binary; they are always on. And if the setsockopt() fails things bomb wiht an exit(1). Which is a bit of a pain if you move them between machines