On 09/05/2012 03:32 AM, Alexander Komyagin wrote: > On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 09:16 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
>> Again, I hope that this trick is not needed to solve your problem, and I >> am worried that it will cause more/different problems elsewhere. I would >> recommend fixing CommOpener instead. If _that_ is not sufficient, we can >> discuss appropriate low-level enhancements. > > Both things shall be fixed, IMHO. If double-connect is not needed, we should not introduce it. AFAICT, double-connect is an attempt to cope with a bug in higher-level code. We should fix that bug and see if that is sufficient. If it is not sufficient, we should evaluate why and only then add appropriate low-level code if needed. The primary goal here is to fix the underlying issue, not just to find a workaround (which you have already provided). Thank you, Alex.
