Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <018801c22345$661c1ff0$6132bc3e@BABEL> From: "Conrad Scott" To: References: <20020704052424 DOT GA15450 AT redhat DOT com> <00e601c2232d$a7c5be10$2300a8c0 AT LAPTOP> <010001c2233f$75231360$6132bc3e AT BABEL> <20020704115207 DOT O21857 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <013801c22341$e3722430$6132bc3e AT BABEL> <20020704120624 DOT P21857 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> Subject: Re: access port 127.0.0.1:1052 (cygserver question) Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 11:27:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 "Corinna Vinschen" wrote: > Isn't that just going out of the way of rewriting some code in a > better way? Just calling unlink() is somewhat ugly, isn't it? But if it works . . . :-) Despite that, agreed, it's my inherent laziness that jumped up and bit me. I'll send it back to its kennel without any supper. I've also no idea as to how complex it would be to avoid using _open inside the socket code, e.g. does it currently work with file descriptors and so would using CreateFile require large scale changes? Just an idea, etc. // Conrad