[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       sylpheed
Subject:    [sylpheed:28437] Re: Bug(let) in the Unix version of sylpheed
From:       Hiroyuki Yamamoto <hiro-y () kcn ! ne ! jp>
Date:       2006-09-06 3:47:30
Message-ID: 20060906124730.37b8bdf7.hiro-y () kcn ! ne ! jp
[Download RAW message or body]

Hello,

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 22:15:12 +0200
Stefaan A Eeckels <Stefaan.Eeckels@ecc.lu> wrote:

> On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:36:13 +0200
> Stefaan A Eeckels <Stefaan.Eeckels@ecc.lu> wrote:
> 
> > I don't know if these are the correct fixes - a better way to ensure
> > that sylpheed doesn't fork() children without reliably waiting for
> > them seems to be desirable.
> 
> They do seem to work - no more zombies since I applied them.

Applied (also to sock_get_address_info_async_cancel()) to the svn.
Thanks.

-- 
Hiroyuki Yamamoto <hiro-y@kcn.ne.jp>

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]