On Tue, Feb 5, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Joe Orton wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 10:41:39AM +0100, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> > Joe Orton wrote:
> > > I mentioned in the bug that the signal handler could cause undefined
> > > behaviour, but I'm not sure now whether that is true. On Linux I can
> > > repr
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 10:41:39AM +0100, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> Joe Orton wrote:
> > I mentioned in the bug that the signal handler could cause undefined
> > behaviour, but I'm not sure now whether that is true. On Linux I can
> > reproduce some cases where this will happen, which are all due to
Joe Orton wrote:
> I mentioned in the bug that the signal handler could cause undefined
> behaviour, but I'm not sure now whether that is true. On Linux I can
> reproduce some cases where this will happen, which are all due to
> well-defined behaviour:
>
> 1) with some (default on Linux) accept mu
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:42:05PM +0100, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> this bug can be quite annoying because of the resources used by the hung
> processes. It happens e.g. under Linux when epoll is used.
>
> The patch from http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42829#c14
> has been in Debia
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:42:05PM +0100, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this bug can be quite annoying because of the resources used by the hung
> processes. It happens e.g. under Linux when epoll is used.
>
> The patch from http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42829#c14
> has been
Hi,
this bug can be quite annoying because of the resources used by the hung
processes. It happens e.g. under Linux when epoll is used.
The patch from http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42829#c14
has been in Debian unstable/Ubuntu hardy for several weeks and there have
not been any