From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 1 16:47:43 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4440D16A402 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2007 16:47:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from citrin@citrin.ru) Received: from mail.classis.ru (classis.ru [213.248.60.120]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B41B113C4A8 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2007 16:47:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from citrin@citrin.ru) Received: from citrin (unknown [81.19.65.100]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: citrin.citrin.ru) by mail.classis.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP id 233FA12279A4; Thu, 1 Mar 2007 19:47:41 +0300 (MSK) Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 19:46:53 +0300 From: Anton Yuzhaninov X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.62.14) Professional Organization: Rambler X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1047693239.20070301194653@citrin.ru> To: Ruslan Ermilov In-Reply-To: <20070301152942.GA27336@rambler-co.ru> References: <2110071423.20070301151729@citrin.ru> <20070301152942.GA27336@rambler-co.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="----------D414CF8269B3701" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re[2]: is setsockopt SO_NOSIGPIPE work? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 16:47:43 -0000 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. ------------D414CF8269B3701 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thursday, March 1, 2007, 6:29:42 PM, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: RE> On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 03:17:29PM +0300, Anton Yuzhaninov wrote: >> Is SO_NOSIGPIPE work? >>=20 >> It try to set on socket option SO_NOSIGPIPE but anyway process >> received sigpipe. >>=20 RE> It works, but only if you use send() instead of write(). RE> Alternatively, you can control the behavior on a per RE> message basis, by passing the MSG_NOSIGNAL in the "flags" RE> argument to the send() call (without having to set a RE> socket option). Thanks, with send() it works fine. I think it should be documented in setsockopt(2). --=20 WBR, Anton Yuzhaninov ------------D414CF8269B3701--