On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 11:55:22PM +0200, Niklas Bergh wrote: > >On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 06:06:24PM +0200, Niklas Bergh wrote: > >> This shouldn't happen, should it? Is that 200 ms wait necessary anymore > >> (wasn't it fixed with the LD_ASSUME_KERNELXX workaround)? > > >I don't think so. And even if it was, there is no harm done. > > No harm done removing or keeping? If the construct might cause > IllegalMonitorStateExceptions (due to whatever reason) I'd say that there is > a slight harm keeping it...
No harm done keeping it. I don't see how keeping it would cause IllegalMonitorStateExceptions - these generally mean wait()ing on something without being synchronized on it first. > > /N -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
