Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > I really wonder if this topic is worth pursuing further without finding > a real-world case that actually fails with the v2.19 code. I.e., is > there actually a server that doesn't set CONTENT_LENGTH and really can't > handle read-to-eof? It's plausible to me, but it's also equally > plausible that we'd be breaking some other case. OK.