Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I know that Bill is looking at a release of APR and
>>> that alternate method would, I think, be better
>>> implemented in APR than directly in httpd...
>>
>> Eww, no thanks. AFAIK the same results can be achieved using existing
>> APR interfaces: a non-blocking apr_socket_recv() passing the MSG_PEEK
>> flag, as I mentioned this on dev@apr already.
>>
>
> I was referring to an APR apr_is_socket_connected()
> function. Seems to me that it's a common enough
> network "test" that providing it directly with an
> APR call is niceness.
>
Can we have that additional function in 1.2.8,
or it's for the trunk only (1.3)?
Also think apr_socket_is_connected would be name
that would follow the function naming convention.
Regards,
Mladen.
|