Re: lynx-dev rfc959 problem...

[T.E.Dickey]

> (2)The reason for queueing the QUIT, rather than sending it after the 
> successful data transfer, was to avoid another full round-trip time - 
> just a bit of optimisation. 

yes - I understood that.
  
> Since it turns out that this doesn't work with all servers - the 
> easies way to make it work would probably be to just remove the two lines 
>  
>     if ((status = send_cmd_nowait("QUIT")) == 1) 
>         outstanding++; 

I considered that, but my understanding of the next large chunk of code is
that it assumes that 'outstanding' is set - and would not be needed (or
valid) if the "quit" were used.  Rather than simply remove that, I wanted
your comments.
  
> (untested). 
>  
> That should work, but it would be nice to then add a send_cmd_1("QUIT") 
> instead of those lines, at least after a successful transfer; probably 
> right before the NETCLOSE(control->socket); for objective (1). 

I'll look at this again - thanks.
  
>    Klaus 
>  


-- 
Thomas E. Dickey
address@hidden
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey