Re: Review Request: Keeps track of Qpid runnable threads and other threads, ensuring that rundown doesn't deadlock.

2011-07-06 Thread Chug Rolke
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/987/#review965 --- Ship it! Cliff, Thanks for your effort on this. Without this patch

Re: Review Request: Keeps track of Qpid runnable threads and other threads, ensuring that rundown doesn't deadlock.

2011-07-05 Thread Cliff Jansen
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/987/ --- (Updated 2011-07-05 17:54:17.154114) Review request for qpid. Changes ---

Re: Review Request: Keeps track of Qpid runnable threads and other threads, ensuring that rundown doesn't deadlock.

2011-07-01 Thread Steve Huston
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/987/#review947 --- My concern with DllMain is that it precludes building qpid as static

Re: Review Request: Keeps track of Qpid runnable threads and other threads, ensuring that rundown doesn't deadlock.

2011-07-01 Thread Steve Huston
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/987/#review949 --- Admin note... when this review is resolved, please ensure that

Re: Review Request: Keeps track of Qpid runnable threads and other threads, ensuring that rundown doesn't deadlock.

2011-07-01 Thread Cliff Jansen
On 2011-07-01 11:44:51, Steve Huston wrote: My concern with DllMain is that it precludes building qpid as static libraries (and having this logic still work). Good point. I was so focused on the bug as presented I lost complete sight of this valid use case. I suppose I could do away

Re: Review Request: Keeps track of Qpid runnable threads and other threads, ensuring that rundown doesn't deadlock.

2011-07-01 Thread Steve Huston
On 2011-07-01 11:44:51, Steve Huston wrote: My concern with DllMain is that it precludes building qpid as static libraries (and having this logic still work). Cliff Jansen wrote: Good point. I was so focused on the bug as presented I lost complete sight of this valid use case.