phil wrote:
[...]
> 5. Sorry I can't be more help. You don't give anyone much > to go on. All that stuff about "Queue(0)" and "listenq" > is pretty much meaningless to us, you know...
You know, I get this all the time on language support groups.
This might be a clue.
It *was* pretty sketchy. Basically you shouldn't expect people to debug code they can't see. There are some very able programmers active on this newsgroup, but their psychic abilities are limited :-)All of my Linux support groups, if they don't understand, say why and ask for elaboration. I tried to explain what was going on, without incuding the source. I have about 200 man hours in the source and I bet it would take longer to understand it. If my explanation was insufficient, I'm sorry.
Once yo post in the newsgroup (or mailing list) then use of the same channel is advisable.ALSO, you did not respond to my email, so I didn't know how to reply. There is nothing on the archives page which gives me a clue as to how to respond.
If you suspect the problem is a bug in Python then you might consider searching the bugs database on sourceforge. If nobody's reported a bug then you are being very optimistic assuming that migrating to 2.4 will fix the problem.SO, if there is ZERO chance there is some sort of inadvertent lock occuring in saved byte code, I just kludge around and move on. Maybe 2.4
Thanks.
regards Steve -- http://www.holdenweb.com http://pydish.holdenweb.com Holden Web LLC +1 800 494 3119 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
