Message136620
| Author | neologix |
|---|---|
| Recipients | neologix, pitrou, ryan003, victorpoluceno, vstinner |
| Date | 2011-05-23.12:14:21 |
| SpamBayes Score | 4.221379e-05 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1306152862.21.0.798153120568.issue5715@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> Oh, Linux 2.6.27+ has a SOCK_CLOEXEC option: It's not exactly the same thing. We want to close the socket right after fork, not wait until exec (in the OP case there was no exec). > Patch looks fine to me. Is it easily testable? Easily, no. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2011-05-23 12:14:22 | neologix | set | recipients: + neologix, pitrou, vstinner, ryan003, victorpoluceno |
| 2011-05-23 12:14:22 | neologix | set | messageid: <1306152862.21.0.798153120568.issue5715@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2011-05-23 12:14:21 | neologix | link | issue5715 messages |
| 2011-05-23 12:14:21 | neologix | create | |