[cups.general] socket backend: why not call shutdown immediately?

[Tim Waugh]

On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 08:40 -0800, Michael Sweet wrote:
> Because some printers break when we do this (more specifically, as
> soon as we shutdown our side of the connection they decide to do the
> same with their side instead of sending any remaining back-channel
> data...)

Rats, I wondered if that was the case.

> However, the reasons for keeping this workaround in place (waiting for
> back-channel data) are going away soon, so maybe in CUPS 1.5 (at
> least) we can just remove the extra "wait for back-channel data" code
> since it isn't needed in the general case - just for drivers or
> "auto-setup tools" on Mac OS X that close their stdout pipe when they
> are done sending data but not done reading a response.
> 
> Care to file a bug?

Sure.

In the mean time, how about if we added a 'waitbc' option to the socket
backend, defaulting to on (the current behaviour), but with 'off'
meaning not to wait?

Tim.
*/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.cups.org/pipermail/cups/attachments/20100205/dadb8de8/attachment.bin>