From 40fea4552377504ce69935149e64e39a595f4600 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Ond=C5=99ej=20Lyson=C4=9Bk?= <olysonek@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 17:50:14 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Move closing standard FDs after listen()

The vsf_sysutil_close() calls need to be moved a bit further so that
die() works properly in case listen() fails.

I see no reason the calls should be placed before listen()
specifically, as they are now. My guess is that the author who added
the calls thought that listen() is a blocking call, which is not the
case. The only thing we need to satisfy is that close() is called
before accept, because that is a blocking call. That's all that is
needed to fix the bug that was fixed by adding the close() calls.

Resolves: rhbz#1666380
---
 standalone.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/standalone.c b/standalone.c
index 3f35e9e..b358ca1 100644
--- a/standalone.c
+++ b/standalone.c
@@ -152,15 +152,15 @@ vsf_standalone_main(void)
       vsf_sysutil_kill(vsf_sysutil_getppid(), kVSFSysUtilSigUSR1);
     }
   }
-  vsf_sysutil_close(0);
-  vsf_sysutil_close(1);
-  vsf_sysutil_close(2);
   retval = vsf_sysutil_listen(listen_sock, VSFTP_LISTEN_BACKLOG);
   if (vsf_sysutil_retval_is_error(retval))
   {
     die("could not listen");
   }
   vsf_sysutil_sockaddr_alloc(&p_accept_addr);
+  vsf_sysutil_close(0);
+  vsf_sysutil_close(1);
+  vsf_sysutil_close(2);
   while (1)
   {
     struct vsf_client_launch child_info;
-- 
2.20.1