Julian Mehnle wrote: > > Alessandro Vesely wrote: > > Ben Kennedy wrote: > > > In this example, pureperlfilter is cleaning up its socket (though > > > sometimes for whatever reason the socket stays around causing it to > > > refuse to launch subsequently); perlfilter is not removing its. > > > > IMHO, the latter is correct. But again, I have no experience with > > pureperlfilter. Shouldn't it work the same way? > > pureperlfilter is the bootstrapping executable for Courier::Filter. C:F > cleans up its socket when shutting down (e.g. when told to by > courierfilter), but refuses to start if the socket it wants to create > already exists.
I see. It is different from Courier's libfilter: libfilter provides for triggering 432 messages when filters are active but temporarily down. Don't you want that functionality? > > I have been thinking about an intelligent way for C:F to detect during > startup if an existing socket is stale (then it may just be overwritten > during restart) or belongs to an already running instance of C:F. But I > haven't invested enough time into this yet. Shouldn't that be courierfilter's job? ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
