> >> /bin/kill -f worked for me.
> >>
> HmmSIGEFF? Haven't heard of that one. At least you can
> reproduce it. >>Thank you.<<
Here, -f means force, using Windows native methods to kill the process
when cygwin signal handling seems to be stuck.
> > I know! It must be because fork
Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 05:11:29PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
The point would be to reduce the amount of code that might need
to be inspected to find the underlying problem. Nothing to do
with publicly available.
---
Would that it was always so
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 10:03:58PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 05:11:29PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
>>Linda Walsh wrote:
>>> Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
Can he or you reduce the problem to a non-File::BOM dependent test
script
>>> What part of
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 05:11:29PM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
>Linda Walsh wrote:
>> Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
>>> Can he or you reduce the problem to a non-File::BOM dependent test
>>> script
>> What part of the perl module File::BOM should I throw out before
>> it's no longer File
Linda Walsh wrote:
> Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
>> Can he or you reduce the problem to a non-File::BOM dependent test
>> script
> What part of the perl module File::BOM should I throw out before
> it's no longer File::BOM? It's just perl code.
>
> It's freely downloadable through CPAN, so I ca
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
Can he or you reduce the problem to a non-File::BOM dependent test script
What part of the perl module File::BOM should I throw out before
it's no longer File::BOM? It's just perl code.
It's freely downloadable through CPAN, so I can't make it too
much more pub
6 matches
Mail list logo
