http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30020 Witold Baryluk <baryluk-winehq(a)smp.if.uj.edu.pl> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |baryluk-winehq(a)smp.if.uj.ed | |u.pl --- Comment #14 from Witold Baryluk <baryluk-winehq(a)smp.if.uj.edu.pl> 2012-04-23 20:52:38 CDT --- It looks that application calls typedef struct linger { u_short l_onoff; u_short l_linger; } linger; linger l; setsockopt(socket_fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_LINGER, &l, sizeof(l)); that it: setsockopt(0x029, 0xffff, 0x80, some_pointer, 4); based on http://www.koders.com/c/fidC79035BEED7D3E043591E5B881A6F2D444287D5C.aspx and http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms739165%28v=vs.85%2... Basically SO_LINGER is also supported on Unix, but on Linux a struct have different definition (according to socket(7) manpage): struct linger { int l_onoff; /* linger active */ int l_linger; /* how many seconds to linger for */ }; Temporary workaround would be to just ignore SO_LINGER calls, and return 0 (success), and hope it will work (because now probably application just sees 22 != 0 and does immiediete exit, but actually ignoring it may work). Full solution will be to create proper mapping in setsockopt and possibly for completion also in getsockopt. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.