Robert Elz wrote: > Not an idea, but a possibility - the change to route.c (1.167) was > unimportant - it doesn't really matter (to the tests) if it does > anything useful or not - it is possible that it just happened that the > fd that the setsockopt() was being performed on was a socket (a suitable > socket) prior to the openssl update, but after that, the rump fd's > shifted around, and what the setsockopt() was operating upon was no > longer a socket. > > No idea if that is really what happened or not, but something like that > is at least plausible (even though it would seem that the changes of the > sys call having worked by accident seem to be not very high).
I agree that this sounds plausible. Also, the tests never failing for Christos might then be explained by him running them in an environment that has a different number of file descriptors already in use. -- Andreas Gustafsson, g...@gson.org