> > You should be guaranteed that the queues are empty (length 0) by the
> > time you get there (because anyone on the queue would hold a ref to the
> > sock). But it wouldn't hurt to have an assert in connq_destroy.
>
> Wouldn't it be more logical to have that assertion in sock_free?
It could
On Sat, Feb 10, 2001 at 08:31:21PM -0500, Roland McGrath wrote:
> That looks correct to me, but you should do connect_queue as well.
Oh, right.
> You
> should be guaranteed that the queues are empty (length 0) by the time you
> get there (because anyone on the queue would hold a ref to the sock)
hi
> Merging the
> efforts with GNOME project will be A Good Thing
> (GConf, ...) - I see it as
> the most progressive GNU project (Unix sucks, but
> we'll fix it:-))).
Yes that is a powerful thing.Especially since ORBIT is
a good choice for such a stuff,I think GNOMERS will be
very interested.Le
