Subj : Re: Semaphore
To   : Rob Swindell
From : Nick Andre
Date : Mon Jan 18 2021 05:20 am

On 17 Jan 21  18:42:46, Rob Swindell said the following to Nick Andre:

RS> Yeah, you're not understanding what I'm saying. BinkD could pretty easily s
RS> a flag when it receives a signal (whatever signal, it doesn't have to be
RS> SIGTERM) and then terminate ***when idle**. It sounds like you're opposed t
RS> the use of a signal for some reasson.

Yeah, I'm not opposed to signals. Its not that difficult to understand the
intention of the request. This is a very busy Hub system where I'd like to 
schedule maintainence when BinkD twiddles its thumbs. Whether thats done with 
semaphore files or signals doesn't matter to me. If someone shows me how to 
accomplish my request on Windows then wonderful... that person gets simple 
kudos and the echo goes back to crickets chirping.

That said, traditional or legacy mailers on DOS, Windows and OS/2 have always
reacted to semaphore files. My software, Frontdoor, Intermail, TBBS/Flame,
etc. as well as Internet Rex. What I "don't understand" is the apparent
visceral reaction by some to have that same simple level of functionality as
the rest. The mere suggestion just gets everyone's rulers out to measure how 
big their Linux egos are.

Its been running here for many years trouble-free... its not the end of the
world if it can't do one little thing. Any further discussion or quote-rants 
or whatever silly symantecs and we have to cough up royalties to Mark Lewis.

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
 * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

.