47 lines
1.5 KiB
Diff
47 lines
1.5 KiB
Diff
|
From 40fea4552377504ce69935149e64e39a595f4600 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
|
||
|
|
From: =?UTF-8?q?Ond=C5=99ej=20Lyson=C4=9Bk?= <olysonek@redhat.com>
|
||
|
|
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 17:50:14 +0200
|
||
|
|
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Move closing standard FDs after listen()
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The vsf_sysutil_close() calls need to be moved a bit further so that
|
||
|
|
die() works properly in case listen() fails.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
I see no reason the calls should be placed before listen()
|
||
|
|
specifically, as they are now. My guess is that the author who added
|
||
|
|
the calls thought that listen() is a blocking call, which is not the
|
||
|
|
case. The only thing we need to satisfy is that close() is called
|
||
|
|
before accept, because that is a blocking call. That's all that is
|
||
|
|
needed to fix the bug that was fixed by adding the close() calls.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Resolves: rhbz#1666380
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
standalone.c | 6 +++---
|
||
|
|
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
diff --git a/standalone.c b/standalone.c
|
||
|
|
index 3f35e9e..b358ca1 100644
|
||
|
|
--- a/standalone.c
|
||
|
|
+++ b/standalone.c
|
||
|
|
@@ -152,15 +152,15 @@ vsf_standalone_main(void)
|
||
|
|
vsf_sysutil_kill(vsf_sysutil_getppid(), kVSFSysUtilSigUSR1);
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
- vsf_sysutil_close(0);
|
||
|
|
- vsf_sysutil_close(1);
|
||
|
|
- vsf_sysutil_close(2);
|
||
|
|
retval = vsf_sysutil_listen(listen_sock, VSFTP_LISTEN_BACKLOG);
|
||
|
|
if (vsf_sysutil_retval_is_error(retval))
|
||
|
|
{
|
||
|
|
die("could not listen");
|
||
|
|
}
|
||
|
|
vsf_sysutil_sockaddr_alloc(&p_accept_addr);
|
||
|
|
+ vsf_sysutil_close(0);
|
||
|
|
+ vsf_sysutil_close(1);
|
||
|
|
+ vsf_sysutil_close(2);
|
||
|
|
while (1)
|
||
|
|
{
|
||
|
|
struct vsf_client_launch child_info;
|
||
|
|
--
|
||
|
|
2.20.1
|
||
|
|
|