D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> | Anyway, I'm going to have to be able to reproduce it and
test any
> | changes thoroughly before potentially re-introducing the hangs I
> | used to see.
>
> Sure. And my suggestion was not tested even by me. It was only part
> of an argument showing that the current code is wrong.
Yeah, but I'm still paranoid about re-introducing the hang I used
to see.
I think I'll just put a "stall(1000);" call after each waitpid().
Works for me...
Dave