On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 17:39, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2013/03/19 18:26, Otto Moerbeek wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 04:00:46PM +0100, Martin Pelikan wrote: >> >> > > wfd is stdin, so doing a shutdown on it will mostly be a noop, right? >> > >> > Of course you're right. I was so focused on finding the bug I didn't >> > look above what the fd is :-( >> > >> > Are you okay with removing this particular shutdown(2) line? >> >> Yes, but it would even be better if there would be an option to get >> the shutdown on EOF behaviour back. >> >> Some servers wait until they see the shutdown from the client to finish >> their work. >> >> -Otto >> > > OK?
woah. Can somebody explain, using very small words, exactly what the problem is? >From reading the ubuntu bug report, their problem comes from adding a -q flag very similar to the proposed -N flag, and *that's* what broke. Unmodified netcat does not have whatever bug they're talking about. Why are we adding a flag that the ubuntu bug report is requesting be reverted? For that matter, if this is a real problem, why are we using -N and not -q? This seems like a wholly gratuitous difference for no benefit.
