From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Mar 29 9:44:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.123.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B363637B71B for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2001 09:44:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nate@yogotech.com) Received: from nomad.yogotech.com (nomad.yogotech.com [206.127.123.131]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA05736; Thu, 29 Mar 2001 10:44:46 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate@nomad.yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by nomad.yogotech.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA11881; Thu, 29 Mar 2001 10:44:36 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate) From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15043.29828.704595.42066@nomad.yogotech.com> Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 10:44:36 -0700 (MST) To: Brian Matthews Cc: "'freebsd-stable@freebsd.org'" Subject: Re: Threads vs. blocking sockets In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 12) "Channel Islands" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > However, I would then expect the threaded versions of the data > transfer calls (send*, etc.) to loop over the actual system calls. Why? Do other OS's not require you to check your return values, to make sure that the call sent everything you expected it to? I believe FreeBSD is acting normally. If you want to send *all* the data, then you need to do your own checking to make sure everything is sent. This is 'expected' behavior. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message