Last call Takashi Kato (30 Jun 2013 07:00 UTC)
Re: Last call Per Bothner (30 Jun 2013 07:46 UTC)
Re: Last call Takashi Kato (30 Jun 2013 08:35 UTC)
Re: Last call Per Bothner (30 Jun 2013 15:47 UTC)
Re: Last call Takashi Kato (30 Jun 2013 17:01 UTC)
Re: Last call Per Bothner (30 Jun 2013 17:19 UTC)
Re: Last call Takashi Kato (30 Jun 2013 17:47 UTC)
Re: Last call Per Bothner (30 Jun 2013 18:04 UTC)
Re: Last call Takashi Kato (30 Jun 2013 18:29 UTC)
Re: Last call Per Bothner (30 Jun 2013 23:11 UTC)
Re: Last call John Cowan (01 Jul 2013 20:01 UTC)
Re: Last call Shiro Kawai (30 Jun 2013 09:02 UTC)
Re: Last call Takashi Kato (30 Jun 2013 09:30 UTC)
Re: Last call Shiro Kawai (30 Jun 2013 09:54 UTC)
Re: Last call Takashi Kato (30 Jun 2013 10:27 UTC)
Re: Last call Shiro Kawai (30 Jun 2013 11:44 UTC)
Re: Last call Takashi Kato (30 Jun 2013 17:02 UTC)

Re: Last call Shiro Kawai 30 Jun 2013 09:54 UTC

E.g. a server accepts a connection, then spawn a child to handle it.
The server wants to close the socket to reclaim fd in the process,
but the child still needs to communicate with the client.

>From: Takashi Kato <xxxxxx@ymail.com>
Subject: Re: Last call
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2013 11:30:36 +0200

> I'll add the following sentence to socket-close;
>
> The procedure should not shutdown the given socket. To shutdown a
> socket, socket-shutdown should be called explicitly.
>
> This is my curiosity. I think most of platforms free fd when close(2)
> is called and means the given socket fd will be invalid. What would be
> the happy case that socket-close doesn't automatically shutdown the
> socket?
>
>
> _/_/
> Takashi Kato
> E-mail: xxxxxx@ymail.com