On Fri, 16 Jul 2004, Alexander Gottwald wrote: > Amr Mohamed Roushdi wrote: > > > Hi Alex it is me again . I am enclosing the strace fot the 1st instance > > good and the 2nd instance which blew out . > > thks for ur help > > from tracegood > > 310 2041721 [main] xwin 2284 cygwin_socket: 6 = socket (2, 2, 0) > 429 2042150 [main] xwin 2284 cygwin_setsockopt: setsockopt optval=1 > 323 2042473 [main] xwin 2284 cygwin_setsockopt: 0 = setsockopt (6, 65535, 20 > (SO_BROADCAST), 0x22EF84, 4) > 672 2043145 [main] xwin 2284 cygwin_bind: 0 = bind (6, 0x769BD0, 16) > > from trace > > 304 2658029 [main] xwin 2312 cygwin_socket: 6 = socket (2, 2, 0) > 321 2658350 [main] xwin 2312 cygwin_setsockopt: setsockopt optval=1 > 311 2658661 [main] xwin 2312 cygwin_setsockopt: 0 = setsockopt (6, 65535, 20 > (SO_BROADCAST), 0x22EF84, 4) > 449 2659110 [main] xwin 2312 __set_winsock_errno: bind:477 - winsock error 10048 > -> errno 112 > 306 2659416 [main] xwin 2312 cygwin_bind: -1 = bind (6, 0x769BD0, 16) > > the winsock error 10048 is WSAEADDRINUSE which means another program is using > the port. Up to this bind the logs are nearly identical (only differs in > process ids, the :5 vs :10 and some small differences with pointers and > handles returned from windows).
Doesn't X bind to different ports depending on the display number? Could it be that the X+10 port is in use, but X+5 isn't? Or am I completely confused? Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! "I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route to the bathroom is a major career booster." -- Patrick Naughton