| commit | 952787031182876d7a79b3e5399cf27979318f43 | |
| author | Torrance, Douglas <dtorrance@piedmont.edu> | |
| Fri, 1 Mar 2019 10:48:49 +0000 (1 10:48 +0000) | ||
| committer | Carlos R. Mafra <crmafra@gmail.com> | |
| Fri, 1 Mar 2019 11:49:03 +0000 (1 11:49 +0000) | ||
| tree | 0eec20362110ec11792d1b5d8e98428a5d645d3b | treesnapshot (tar.gz zip) |
| parent | e807986e6e1cdb179cc0e0e830f2215a695c396a | commitdiff |
wmbiff: Remove unnecessary loop.
The last release of wmbiff included a patch by Nye Liu from Debian
bug #917467 [1]. However, the second part of that patch is not necessary.
From Andreas Metzler's comment
I am not sure about the second part of the patch. I understand wmbiff
breaking on GNUTLS_E_AGAIN from gnutls_read, because this only started
to happen recently (with TLS1.3) on blocking sockets.
What I do not get from my rudimentary understanding C programmimg is the
second part, this is in the else of "if (scs->tls_state)", so, afaiui for
non-encrypted connections. Is the change necessary there at all, is it
the right thing to retry read on EAGAIN then?
We revert the second part of the patch.
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/917467
The last release of wmbiff included a patch by Nye Liu from Debian
bug #917467 [1]. However, the second part of that patch is not necessary.
From Andreas Metzler's comment
I am not sure about the second part of the patch. I understand wmbiff
breaking on GNUTLS_E_AGAIN from gnutls_read, because this only started
to happen recently (with TLS1.3) on blocking sockets.
What I do not get from my rudimentary understanding C programmimg is the
second part, this is in the else of "if (scs->tls_state)", so, afaiui for
non-encrypted connections. Is the change necessary there at all, is it
the right thing to retry read on EAGAIN then?
We revert the second part of the patch.
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/917467
| wmbiff/wmbiff/tlsComm.c | diffblobblamehistory |