> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Andi Vajda > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 9:11 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [pylucene-dev] status of pylucene & mod_python > > > On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Ofer Nave wrote: > > > So far I agree with you. Though I'm not ready to give up trying. > > Excellent. The real solution lies with gcj/libgcj. I believe, > gcj 4.2.0 (not yet released ?) actually has fixes that allow > threads to be registered with libgcj's GC after the fact via > the JvAttachCurrentThread() API and these fixes are probably > (?) limited to Linux (Red Hat only ?) at the moment. I've had > no time to investigate this much but I believe I saw mail > about this on [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you don't want to give up, > this is the most promising route as it would let you use > PyLucene without the current stringent threading constraints.
I'm glad you remain optimistic. :) Unfortunately, I'm an amateur at this level of the game. I've never even coded a threaded app before, or used gcc outside of running make on a source distribution. So the best I can do is give you feedback and bug people/lists on your behalf. > > Been dying to use subprocess since I started writing Python > almost a > > month ago. Waiting on the admins to have time to upgrade > from Python > > 2.3 on my dev box. > > Ohhh, you're using Python 2.3 ? Python 2.3.x with x < 5 has > some threading deadlock problem that was fixed in later versions. Son of a... I'm currently on 2.3.4. That's it. I'm going to make sure Python is upgraded by the end of the day. -ofer _______________________________________________ pylucene-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/pylucene-dev
