Serge,
Thanks for reviewing the patch.
"Serge Dubrouski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And I don't like the idea of removing PID in "start" function. The
> standard approach if to remove it after stopping application. Other
> way it could lead to attempt of starting a second copy of application.
On 2/25/07, Keisuke MORI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Serge,
Thanks for reviewing the patch.
"Serge Dubrouski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And I don't like the idea of removing PID in "start" function. The
> standard approach if to remove it after stopping application. Other
> way it could lea
"Serge Dubrouski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Serge Dubrouski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > And I don't like the idea of removing PID in "start" function. The
>> > standard approach if to remove it after stopping application. Other
>> > way it could lead to attempt of starting a second c
