From owner-freebsd-bugs Thu Feb 25 10:21:22 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE5414E3C for ; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:20:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.2/8.9.2) id KAA24633; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:20:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:20:05 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199902251820.KAA24633@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: David Hedley Subject: Re: kern/10028: TCP problem binding port - address already in use Reply-To: David Hedley Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR kern/10028; it has been noted by GNATS. From: David Hedley To: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Cc: Subject: Re: kern/10028: TCP problem binding port - address already in use Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 08:45:41 +0000 (GMT) Problem resolved. It seems that the program in question restarts 'routed' as part of its operation. When it execs a new routed, the child process inherits it's parents open file descriptors - including any active sockets. Consequently when the server process restarts, it can no longer bind to its socket. A stupid problem really, and one easily fixed by setting the close-on-exec flag on the sockets in question. My apologies for troubling everyone with this, and thanks for everyone's efforts in trying to track it down - I should have known better than to have thought it a problem with FreeBSD! David -- Dr David Hedley,Inty Development,Bristol,UK,0117 9050500,http://www.inty.net/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message