Jeff Trawick wrote: > > AFAICT, nobody here thinks that AcceptMutex isn't needed. OTOH, I > don't think anybody is on the same wavelength with you > w.r.t. "AcceptMutex none" :) giggle :) -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither"
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patch ?? Jim Jagielski
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patc... Dirk-Willem van Gulik
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patch ?? Marc Slemko
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patch ?? Bill Stoddard
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patch ?? Jim Jagielski
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patc... Bill Stoddard
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patc... Dirk-Willem van Gulik
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patch ?? Jim Jagielski
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patch ?? Jeff Trawick
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patc... Jim Jagielski
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patch ?? Bill Stoddard
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patc... Jim Jagielski
- Re: Comments on accept-mutex/single-listen patch ?? Dirk-Willem van Gulik