Re: status of multiheaded patch (fwd)
David Mihm (davemann@ionet.net)
Mon, 15 Feb 1999 00:56:54 -0600 (CST)
This is in reqards to the dual screen patch that was submitted,
and what finally ended up being the "solution" done by Ethan.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 17:48:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Albert Max Lai <amlai@columbia.edu>
To: David Mihm <davemann@ionet.net>
Subject: Re: status of multiheaded patch
On Mon, 4 Jan 1999, David Mihm wrote:
> if any, throughout the entire code tree. One philosophy has been
> prevelant, as one of the programmers said, to not you system() calls due
> to security reasons; so until more testing could be done, we held off on
> the change.
Just to let you know, I just tried the 1.6.10 version of afterstep. The
fix in 1.6.10 has the same problem as in previous versions (I believe).
The child processes seem to die right after being launched, killing the
parent process as well. My previous fix works as before.
> I'm sure it'll be included or another method will be adopted soon.
> Thanks for your continued intrest. :)
--
Albert Lai <amlai@columbia.edu> 1018D East Campus
Residential Computer Consultant 411 W. 116th St.
Columbia University New York, NY 10027
http://www.columbia.edu/~aml61 (212)853-4854