From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Apr 8 12:13:24 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99AF237B95B for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2000 12:13:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id MAA12113; Sat, 8 Apr 2000 12:13:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2000 12:13:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <200004081913.MAA12113@apollo.backplane.com> To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: Sean Peck , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD 3.3 fork/Exec bug? References: <20000408084711.W4381@fw.wintelcom.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :> they connected to :> server and recieved nothing, yet the server does not register the :> connection or request for info. If I run the client independently (not :> via fork/execlp) everything works just fine. :> :> This code is deployed and operational on BSDi without a problem, so I :> assume that this is OS related, does anyone know anything about, or can :> help me with this? : :Without some example code to demostrate the problem there's not much :we can do to address this. : This kinda sounds like a case where the server process has its listen descriptor and when it fork/exec's the child it is either not setting the close-on-exec flag for the descriptor, or the child is not closing the descriptor. Since this is an exec, I'll bet the problem is that the server is not setting the close-on-exec flag for the descriptor. -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message