Re: socket.unbind or socket.unlisten? - socket.error: (48, 'Address already in use')

2009-02-02 Thread Aahz
In article , Grant Edwards wrote: >On 2009-02-01, Steve Holden wrote: > >> I believe this is because Microsoft failed to understand the >> original meaning of ___, and persisted with >> this ghastly error in the name of backwards compatibility, >> justifying it by suggesting that

Re: socket.unbind or socket.unlisten? - socket.error: (48, 'Address already in use')

2009-02-01 Thread Grant Edwards
On 2009-02-01, Steve Holden wrote: > I believe this is because Microsoft failed to understand the > original meaning of ___, and persisted with > this ghastly error in the name of backwards compatibility, > justifying it by suggesting that _. Somebody shou

Re: socket.unbind or socket.unlisten? - socket.error: (48, 'Address already in use')

2009-02-01 Thread Steve Holden
Laszlo Nagy wrote: > >> 8<-- >> >> >>> ... Setting the >>> SO_REUSEADDR flag on POSIX fixes this problem (don't set it on Windows, >>> though). >>> >> >> Why not? I have been merrily setting it, and I have not noticed >> anything weird. >> (yet) >> > Ple

Re: socket.unbind or socket.unlisten? - socket.error: (48, 'Address already in use')

2009-02-01 Thread Steve Holden
Laszlo Nagy wrote: > >> 8<-- >> >> >>> ... Setting the >>> SO_REUSEADDR flag on POSIX fixes this problem (don't set it on Windows, >>> though). >>> >> >> Why not? I have been merrily setting it, and I have not noticed >> anything weird. >> (yet) >> > Ple

Re: socket.unbind or socket.unlisten? - socket.error: (48, 'Address already in use')

2009-01-31 Thread Laszlo Nagy
8<-- ... Setting the SO_REUSEADDR flag on POSIX fixes this problem (don't set it on Windows, though). Why not? I have been merrily setting it, and I have not noticed anything weird. (yet) Please see my original post. I specifically stated that I d

Re: socket.unbind or socket.unlisten? - socket.error: (48, 'Address already in use')

2009-01-27 Thread Mark Wooding
Laszlo Nagy writes: > I have a program that uses socket.bind() and socket.listen() > frequently. After that program stops, it is not able to bind() again for a > while: This is the usual TIME-WAIT problem. The TCP protocol requires one end of the connection (whichever actually started the close

Re: socket.unbind or socket.unlisten? - socket.error: (48, 'Address already in use')

2009-01-27 Thread Hendrik van Rooyen
"Jean-Paul Calderone" wrote: 8<-- > ... Setting the > SO_REUSEADDR flag on POSIX fixes this problem (don't set it on Windows, > though). Why not? I have been merrily setting it, and I have not noticed anything weird. (yet) - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org

Re: socket.unbind or socket.unlisten? - socket.error: (48, 'Address already in use')

2009-01-27 Thread Jean-Paul Calderone
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 10:49:03 +0100, Laszlo Nagy wrote: I have a program that uses socket.bind() and socket.listen() frequently. After that program stops, it is not able to bind() again for a while: File "/home/gandalf/Python/Lib/orb/accesspoints/srvtcp.py", line 27, in __init__ self.serve

socket.unbind or socket.unlisten? - socket.error: (48, 'Address already in use')

2009-01-27 Thread Laszlo Nagy
I have a program that uses socket.bind() and socket.listen() frequently. After that program stops, it is not able to bind() again for a while: File "/home/gandalf/Python/Lib/orb/accesspoints/srvtcp.py", line 27, in __init__ self.serversocket.bind((self.listen_address,self.port)) File "", l