hi, thanks for that,
I'm currently testing the Iohannes version that fix the SIGPIPE crash I realized my patches crash more often since I'm using [tcpserver], this is why I tested it alone a lot and find some issues i tried to overcome I think I will run the server in a separate instance of Pd to avoid crash and blocked ports + a -- do it yourself http://antoine.villeret.free.fr 2013/7/4 Roman Haefeli <[email protected]> > On Don, 2013-07-04 at 14:20 +0200, Antoine Villeret wrote: > > ok thanks for the explanation > > > > > > so, for now, there is now way to setup a working [udpserver] in pd > > right ? > > if so, I will stay with [tcpserver] even if I don't need tcp... > > I think that is your best bet. > > I'm still not quite clear what problems you're trying to overcome. Have > you tried my patches? Do they work? If not, in what way do they fail? > > In the meanwhile I came to the conclusion it's probably not worth > putting too much time into a server failure proof design. If the sole > purpose of the server is to act as a message relay between clients, it > will most likely run stable enough. For instance, the netpd server which > is also basically a relay for messages usually runs for months without > crashing. If you have a stable server, many of the workarounds you had > to implement are not necessary. 'Simple' often equals stable. > > Roman > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev >
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
