Hi Dhammika,
I've checked this patch. See my comments inlines.
Sorry for the delay :( I still have your shutdown patch in the review
queue. I've checked it once and it seemed to be OK, but the shutdown
code is so complex that I want to check it once more.
Martin
From
Hi Martin,
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 3:08 AM, Martin Sustrik sust...@250bpm.com wrote:
Hi Dhammika,
I've checked this patch. See my comments inlines.
Sorry for the delay :( I still have your shutdown patch in the review queue.
I've checked it once and it seemed to be OK, but the shutdown code
Hi,
I posted an issue at github:
https://github.com/zeromq/zeromq2/issues#issue/134
The only reply was that this topic should be discussed in the mailing
list. As there hasn't started any discussion about it yet I'll start one.
The problem is that abstract unix domain sockets of the style
Hi Moritz,
The problem is that abstract unix domain sockets of the style
\0mysocketname are accepted, but not handled correctly. I posted some
example here: http://paste.pocoo.org/show/300124/
There are three options how to handle that:
1. There's no problem. There should be a valid path
2010/12/8 Martin Sustrik sust...@250bpm.com
We could switch to standard POSIX-style addresses -- addr_zmq structure
containing fixed buffer and length -- however, that is an backward
incompatible change and cannot be done before major version number bump
(3.0).
It could also be introduced
On 8 December 2010 16:21, Martin Sustrik sust...@250bpm.com wrote:
Similar problem is resolving the NIC names. These are different on
different OSes (eth0, en0, e1000g etc.) but auto-resolve is kind of
convenient. Still, I've seen people arguing that raw IP addresses should
be used instead.
On 8 December 2010 17:08, Steven McCoy steven.mc...@miru.hk wrote:
On 8 December 2010 16:21, Martin Sustrik sust...@250bpm.com wrote:
Similar problem is resolving the NIC names. These are different on
different OSes (eth0, en0, e1000g etc.) but auto-resolve is kind of
convenient. Still, I've
