From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Ericsson Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-daemon: --inetd implies --syslog Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 22:23:58 +0100 Message-ID: <4379006E.8020607@op5.se> References: <20051114164101.58A495BF92@nox.op5.se> <7vlkzrx84p.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Git Mailing List X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 14 22:26:58 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Eblo6-0006Z9-1P for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 22:24:06 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932140AbVKNVYB (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Nov 2005 16:24:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932142AbVKNVYB (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Nov 2005 16:24:01 -0500 Received: from linux-server1.op5.se ([193.201.96.2]:11461 "EHLO smtp-gw1.op5.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932140AbVKNVYA (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Nov 2005 16:24:00 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.19] (1-2-9-7a.gkp.gbg.bostream.se [82.182.116.44]) by smtp-gw1.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 372C46BD01; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 22:23:59 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc3 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7vlkzrx84p.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > exon@op5.se (Andreas Ericsson) writes: > > >>Otherwise nothing is logged anywhere, which is a Bad Thing. >> >>Signed-off-by: Andreas Ericsson > > > Thanks; I am OK with what you are trying to do with this change, > except that: > > - I suspect closing stderr is still needed (the "workaround" > was about inetd connection sending output to both fd 1 and 2 > to the client, which would corrupt the protocol conversation > when exec'ed program writes anything to its standard error > stream). > That shouldn't be a problem because; 1) handle() dupes the connected socket to stdin and stdout, but not stderr. 2) A program sending output to stderr() fails (well, *should* be either failing or silent), so it's most likely not sane to continue doing things anyway. This assumes that no client prints anything to stderr that can be interpreted as "real" protocol data, ofcourse. > - I would have preferred the removal of needless else as a > separate cleanup patch (this is minor). > Sorry. I think I missed that part when I glanced at the diff output. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231