> > This has been done several times in their mailing list already. Apparently > it requires some internal redesign >
I saw the posts a month or so ago when I was writing the connectors for the test cases and I couldn't figure out why the Simple connector kept getting "address in use" SocketExceptions. I'm shocked that a web server was designed without a way to shutdown and I'm shocked that its been over a year (at least) and nothing has been done about it. On Jan 10, 2008 10:19 AM, Jerome Louvel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Kevin, > > This has been done several times in their mailing list already. Apparently > it requires some internal redesign, see this reply from Simple's author : > > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_name=20061104190803.23377.qmail%40web36705.mail.mud.yahoo.com > > Best regards, > Jerome > > > 2008/1/10, Kevin Conaway < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Bug the Simple developers. I am absolutely astonished that they don't > > provide a clean way to shut down their server. > > > > On Jan 10, 2008 2:59 AM, Paul J. Lucas < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Well, I just tried calling System.exit(0) and nothing happens: the > > > process doesn't exit. FYI: I'm using the Simple HTTP server. There > > > are a bunch of threads stuck in wait(). > > > > > > How can I shutdown the server and cause the process to exit? > > > > > > - Paul > > > > > > > > > On Jan 9, 2008, at 11:43 PM, Paul J. Lucas wrote: > > > > > > > When I start my server, I have: > > > > > > > > component = new Component(); > > > > // ... > > > > component.start(); > > > > > > > > To shutdown a server, I assume I do: > > > > > > > > component.stop(); > > > > > > > > However, the process doesn't stop. Should I then simply do: > > > > > > > > System.exit( 0 ); > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > >
