John Holman wrote:
>
> Ken
>
> Thanks for the quick fix, which has solved the IDLE problem.
No problem.
> I should probably point out though that this fix does not address the
> problem I reported last week. It seems to me that under different
> circumstances the copy command could still fai
Ken
Thanks for the quick fix, which has solved the IDLE problem.
I should probably point out though that this fix does not address the
problem I reported last week. It seems to me that under different
circumstances the copy command could still fail in an unsafe way, leading to
loss of messages.
