Re: bin/176713: [patch] nc(1) closes network socket too soon

2013-07-20 Thread Adrian Chadd
Wait a second. What's going on under the hood? You _should_ be able to shutdown the write side of the socket and have it not affect reading. It's a broken server if it does a read(), find that the socket is returning EOF, and then not waiting for the write() to fail before closing. If that's actu

Re: bin/176713: [patch] nc(1) closes network socket too soon

2013-07-20 Thread Mark Delany
> servers running certain protocols. For example, the rules of the SMTP > protocol... just to name one... require that a client wait until the > server has sent out an initial greeting banner before the client sends > anything to the server. Some SMTP servers are lenient about enforcing > this pr

Re: bin/176713: [patch] nc(1) closes network socket too soon

2013-07-20 Thread Ronald F. Guilmette
In message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fernando_Apestegu=EDa?= wrote: >It seems to work for me: Good. Just to make sure that we are clear, you are simply confirming what my bug report (bin/176713) said, i.e. that _without_ my fix, nc can prematurely truncate the output from some servers, whereas _with_ my

Re: bin/176713: [patch] nc(1) closes network socket too soon

2013-07-20 Thread Fernando Apesteguía
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > > > Could someone please take a look at this bug report (bin/176713) and > also at the simple patch that I provided to fix the problem? > > This is quite a serious problem, and my PR has been pending with no > action since Wed, 6 Mar 20

bin/176713: [patch] nc(1) closes network socket too soon

2013-07-20 Thread Ronald F. Guilmette
Could someone please take a look at this bug report (bin/176713) and also at the simple patch that I provided to fix the problem? This is quite a serious problem, and my PR has been pending with no action since Wed, 6 Mar 2013. Regards, rfg P.S. Please note that in reality, I do not believe