On Wed, 2012-01-11 at 01:23:15 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Guillem Jover wrote: > > I'm committing a fix, that still uses a cached file per process. > > Thanks, that makes sense. Sorry, I should think more before throwing > things out like that atfork suggestion. > > Thanks and sorry for the noise.
No reason to be sorry! When there's no clear best solution, all possibly good implementation suggestions are always welcome. I didn't mean to sound harsh, though? thanks, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
