Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT syncretize DOT net>
To: "'Conrad Scott'" <Conrad DOT Scott AT dsl DOT pipex DOT com>
Cc: <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: RE: access port 127.0.0.1:1052 (cygserver question) <PLEASE REPLY TO THIS ONE>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 22:00:01 +1000
Message-ID: <001201c22352$54249810$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
In-Reply-To: <010001c2233f$75231360$6132bc3e@BABEL>
Importance: Normal



> -----Original Message-----
> From: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com 
> [mailto:cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com] On Behalf Of Conrad Scott
> Sent: Thursday, 4 July 2002 7:45 PM
> To: Robert Collins
> Cc: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
> Subject: Re: access port 127.0.0.1:1052 (cygserver question) 
> <PLEASE REPLY TO THIS ONE>
> 
> 
> "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT syncretize DOT net> wrote:
> > Sounds like the cygserver domain socket was left open
> > (perhaps due to cygserver being forcibly killed),
> > and each process was trying to connect to the cygserver.
> 
> Rob,
> 
> AFAICS it's simply the presence of the socket file (/tmp/cygdaemo)
> that triggers this behaviour, i.e. it doesn't require anything to go
> wrong to trigger this.  You can re-start the machine and the presence
> of the file causes clients to attempt to connect to the daemon.

Yes. I've read the whole thread now. When I wrote that part I was under
the (apparently) mistaken impression that unix domain sockets, like
other sockets, disappear on the last close. Sigh.

Rob