On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 08:41:35AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote: > Ryan Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Monday 15 October 2001 10:38 am, Jeff Trawick wrote: > > > > I seriously doubt that we want to extend the apr_proc_t type anymore. > > Having > > this type be complete has caused Windows to have to jump through hoops to > > keep track of processes correctly, and adding more to it is a > > mistake IMO. > > (rest of Ryan's comments omitted) > > I'll reimplement according to your suggestions and post again.
Ryan's solution seems fine to me. We're not usually too concerned with programs exiting due to a signal, since we are just running diff, patch or a small script. Sorry to have overlooked that when I made the patch before. Thanks for noticing it Jeff. > -- > Jeff Trawick | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | PGP public key at web site: > http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/ > Born in Roswell... married an alien... -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Kevin Pilch-Bisson http://www.pilch-bisson.net "Historically speaking, the presences of wheels in Unix has never precluded their reinvention." - Larry Wall ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
pgp9VUAU521A1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
