On 12/08/2009 14:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Aug 12 14:48, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 12/08/2009 13:54, Jon TURNEY wrote:
Hmmm... but if it's really the size of the sockname argument which is
causing the accept() to fail, this would be a bug in cygwin's accept()
implementation, as it's supposed to truncate the data written to the
sockname, rather than fail if it won't fit [1]. If that actually is the
case, since we don't actually use the peer address here, the code as
stands is correct (if a little odd).
I suppose I need to write a small test case to look at this...
[1] http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/accept.html
A couple of small programs which hopefully demonstrate this problem.
(As is, the connection fails, but uncommenting the alternate definition
of cliaddr in listener.c allows it to work)
I'd hazard a guess that perhaps this is because the underlying winsock
accept() doesn't have this truncate behaviour and considers a too-small
address_len an error.
Thanks for the testcase!
Oh, I meant to say "A couple of small programs shamelessly copied from UNIX
Network Programming". So don't thank me, thank W. Richard Stevens :-)
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
