[E-devel] Blocking name resolution...

2003-03-18 Thread pchunt
thar be tcp/ip support in ecore_con now... you can connect to any machine to any port.. anywhere or advertise a service on any port... and get clients connecting... :) it works! only 1 things that really pisses me off.. the blocking gethostbyname(). i don't like that one little bit. i might want t

Re: [E-devel] Blocking name resolution...

2003-03-18 Thread Ibukun Olumuyiwa
On Tue 18 Mar 2003, pchunt wrote: > > >thar be tcp/ip support in ecore_con now... you can connect to any machine > >to > >any port.. anywhere or advertise a service on any port... and get clients > >connecting... :) it works! only 1 things that really pisses me off.. the > >blocking gethostbyname

Re: [E-devel] Blocking name resolution...

2003-03-18 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:34:27 CST, Ibukun Olumuyiwa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Non-blocking name resolution would require > - At least one fork() Or good thread support. Or (for some applications) careful design of the event loop around a select(). pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [E-devel] Blocking name resolution...

2003-03-18 Thread The Rasterman
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 22:05:19 +1000 pchunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled: > > > thar be tcp/ip support in ecore_con now... you can connect to any machine to > > any port.. anywhere or advertise a service on any port... and get clients > > connecting... :) it works! only 1 things that really pisses m

Re: [E-devel] Blocking name resolution...

2003-03-18 Thread The Rasterman
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:46:12 +1000 pchunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled: > Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > > >now if we go fork... do we fork for every dns lookup? for fork once per app? > >just leave the forked child around "in case" we need it? do we institute a > >system-wide dns helpe