Hi Allen! Thanks for your favorable feedback on the new patch. Have you had a chance to test it for a while?
egbert. wrote: > Only I’m not sure about the signals – is it the case that > if we get a signal, we will simply abort the read/write and return error? Yes, that's correct. > (That seems reasonable). But a quick grep on INTR shows that someone was > worried about signals at one point. I believe those would be user-generated signals. (e.g. someone types ctrl-c). (As far as I know) mutt isn't setting up such signals itself, so I think it's okay to remove the tls_socket_read loop. > * It’s good that you expanded this to include write sockets as well. But I > really think that the write timeout and the read timeout should be separate > config vars. For me, for example, I will have the read timeout set to > something low (5 or 10 seconds). But if I’m sending an email with a large > attachment, or on a slow connection, I want it to be something like 1 minute > or even 2. The timeout isn't for the entire upload/download, it's for each individual read/write operation. At least in smtp.c mutt is generally using buffer sizes of 1K. Additionally, in gnutls (from what I remember poking in the code), a partial read/write will return the data and won't set an error. So you would only have to be concerned if no data at all was received or sent during the timeout interval. Based on that behavior, I don't think exposing settings for each would be helpful. (And mutt already has plenty of settings...) I mostly use mutt via offlineimap, and use msmtp, so I don't have a lot of opportunities to exercise this patch. I'm very interested to hear how it works over a period of time. It's a bit late for this release, but I'd really like to get it in for the next release. -- Kevin J. McCarthy GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C 5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA http://www.8t8.us/configs/gpg-key-transition-statement.txt
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
