On 10/1/07, chas williams - CONTRACTOR <chas@...> wrote:
> In message <1caff7430709190816x7cc23b9eh827d5af8fa926461@...
> th guardian" writes:
> >Has anyone checked the patch? I'd like to know at least if this is the
> >"way to go". I want to proceed my work towards a persistent daemon,
> >and don't want to base my code in things that will never be accepted..
> i was out for a week and didnt get to it last week. sorry. it looks
> fine to me. unless someone objects i will commit it later this
Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad it's ok, I can now move on to the
A friend gave me a suggestion on how to make the daemon really "parse
first and do later" without removing the multiple interface support.
It will not be as optimal as it would without such support, but at
least nobody complains :)