Re: [Mutt] #1220: After telnet session dies, Mutt continues running,

#1220: After telnet session dies, Mutt continues running, gradually consuming all CPU resources. Comment (by brendan): Thanks very much for figuring this one out, Vincent. I was able to reproduce on linux, but not OS X (where the HUP signal is always delivered even when I kill -9 sshd). On li

Re: [Mutt] #2890: SMTP support: "...sending in background"

#2890: SMTP support: "...sending in background" Changes (by barsnick): * status: assigned => closed * resolution: => worksforme Comment: The behavior was sporadic anyway - perhaps some ugly timeouts or short disconnections or downtimes. Anyway, with vanilla 1.5.16, I haven't been able

Re: [Mutt] #1220: After telnet session dies, Mutt continues running,

#1220: After telnet session dies, Mutt continues running, gradually consuming all CPU resources. Comment (by vinc17): Replying to [comment:7 brendan]: > please let me know if it solves it on OS X too. Yes, it solves the problem on OS X. Thanks. > By the way, I don't think assignment to err

mutt: new changeset

New changeset in mutt: http://dev.mutt.org/hg/mutt/rev/d096219907e7 changeset: 5196:d096219907e7 branch: HEAD tag: tip user:Brendan Cully <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> date:Thu Aug 16 09:32:33 2007 -0700 summary: Check for lost tty if getch returns error (closes #1220) --

Re: dev.mutt.org web server

On Friday, 17 August 2007 at 16:02, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > One can no longer do connections to "http://dev.mutt.org/";. > What is happening? The server panicked. I'm still investigating the cause, but it's back up now. pgpTRF3XiJs6W.pgp Description: PGP signature

dev.mutt.org web server

One can no longer do connections to "http://dev.mutt.org/";. What is happening? -- Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Re: [Mutt] #1220: After telnet session dies, Mutt continues running,

#1220: After telnet session dies, Mutt continues running, gradually consuming all CPU resources. Comment (by brendan): Replying to [comment:9 vinc17]: > Replying to [comment:7 brendan]: > > By the way, I don't think assignment to errno is portable (which you do in your patch). > > It's exp