On Freitag, 27. November 2009, Erik Faye-Lund wrote: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Erik Faye-Lund > <kusmabite@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > At the very least, I should remove the > > "dup2(incoming, 1)"-call, but I'm open to other suggestions. Perhaps I > > can change this patch to do the entire socket-passing (which is > > currently in the next patch)? No, an infrastructure change in a separate patch is good. > Something along these lines? > > ---8<--- > - cld.in = cld.out = fd; > + cld.in = dup(fd); > + cld.out = fd; >... > - dup2(incoming, 0); > - dup2(incoming, 1); > - close(incoming); > - > - exit(execute(0, addr)); > + exit(execute(incoming, addr)); > ---8<--- Yes, this looks very good. > When I think more about it, I might've broken the inetd-mode as it > should communicate over stdin and stdout (not just stdin as it would > try to do now)... I don't know the inetd internals, but this frightens > me a bit. Do we need inetd mode on Windows? At one time a looked for a inetd-like service, but couldn't find one. -- Hannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html