Harrie Hazewinkel wrote: > > How is the locking of the information maintained. A wild guess is that > the threads maintaining the connection and associated data is > changed during the creation of the status page. In other words > some pointer gets changed or some memory block gets freed and the > pointer is not made NULL and testing the pointer for not NULL would > make you think it is still there. Thus more locking is needed for > simultanious access of the data. I noticed that this is a problem > while making an SNMP extension.
yep, I'll check this again. > > I'd like to release a new development version after we have fixed at > > least this and maybe 2 or 3 other things. Especially concerning the > > new HTTP request queueing in smsbox. I'll also try to add a status > > access information about smsbox's internal state. > > WOuld do you want to do?? 1) branch of from 1.2.0 release and add the fixes > there or 2) take the current head and fix that?? what's the better alternative?! > > So who's +1 for releasing 1.1.7? Votes from the contributors please. > > BTW, is the version number plan right with 1.1.7 as development > > version, which is *newer* than 1.2.0 but the version number is less?! > > I would advise against this. The numbering scheme is not inconsistent. > Almost every one would say 1.2.0 is a newer release then 1.1.7. > And this also depends on how and where you want to branch/tag from. are you for releasing development version as 1.1.7 or 1.3.x? I didn't get the essentials from this statement, sorry Harrie. Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------- Wapme Systems AG Vogelsanger Weg 80 40470 D�sseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de ------------------------------------------------------------------- wapme.net - wherever you are
