On Nov 1 20:56, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] via cygwin wrote: > Hi, > > Looks like CYGWIN defines but does not honor the SOCK_NONBLOCK flag when used > with socket(2). > > (It also defines SOCK_CLOEXEC but I haven't checked whether it is honored -- > full disclosure.) > > Consider the following code:
Spot on, thanks for the testcase. Neither SOCK_NONBLOCK, nor SOCK_CLOEXEC worked as expected. What was I thinking at the time...? I pushed a patch and I'm just uploading new developer snapshots to https://cygwin.com/snapshots/ while I'm typing. Please give them a try. Thanks, Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Maintainer
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
