Derek Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > In all seriousness, while I would agree with you if you made the > argument that OO should responsibly handle signals and exit cleanly, > I don't think it's a tenable position to argue that you should be able > to depend on a clean exit when you essentially crash the program by > forcibly disconnecting it from the X server to which it's connected... > I know nothing about the code, but I can imagine that a program which > is so large and complex might make for tricky proper handling of > signals...
In all seriousness, I don't think that I am being unreasonable when I expect a program to shut itself down cleanly. When I write programs I strive to make them do this. I expect nothing less from an office suite as nice as OO. If anybody has any useful suggestions regarding how I can configure OO to do what I asked for, I'd love to hear these. OTOH, I simply am not interested in advice which is grounded in the assumption that I should have to do tedious work for the computer. Regards, --kevin -- Computers are supposed to serve man, not vice versa ... the experience of the last 40 years notwithstanding. --Larry Wall in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
