Disconnect send path and banner - #67
Open
brainstorm wants to merge 3 commits into
Open
brainstorm wants to merge 3 commits into
brainstorm wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi @mkj,
I'm still chasing the reason behind sunset not properly closing the client connection on Ctrl-C and requiring a SIGKILL or the "secret" OpenSSH sub-console to terminate the session on the client side :)
But anyhow, this PR is more about brainstorm/ssh-stamp#123 and brainstorm/ssh-stamp#144 where we try to report machine-readable strings back to the client (with order-predictable JSON) and its HIL (Hardware In the Loop) testing and automation that @jubeormk1 has been putting together.
The first PR needs some more work to reduce complexity but in any case, I figured this might be a good addition to sunset w.r.t RFC 4253 "for completeness" in the "worst case", and in the best case, fixing the bug described in my first sentence (giving the client a bit more info other than just abruptly dropping the connection)?
Cheers!
/cc @mmalenic