This problem is a very interesting commentary on the issue of "responsibilities" in software development.
IMO also it is a classic (and well-known) WIn95 bug; on the other hand, the "fix" from VNC is what I perceive as a classic Unixish apporach where a component takes on more thanit's share of the burden in resolving a problem. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Ossmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday/2002 January 14 14:38 Subject: Re: WinVNC 3.3.3r9 Memory Leak : On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 11:50:49AM -0000, Steve Daly wrote: : > : > SOLUTION : > A workaround for Win95 use is to install the Winsock2 Upgrade. : > It would obviously be better to modify WinVNC so that it will work on all : > Winsock versions without leaking memory : <snip> : > Any comments on the vailidity of caching the hostname would be appreciated : : Sounds great to me, although I disagree with your classification of : solutions and workarounds. The bug is in Win95. Fixing the bug is the : solution. Working around the problem in WinVNC is a workaround, but it : would be a welcome one. : : Thanks for taking the time to figure this out. : : -- : Mike Ossmann, Tarantella/UNIX Engineer/Instructor : Alternative Technology, Inc. http://www.alttech.com/ : --------------------------------------------------------------------- : To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line: : 'unsubscribe vnc-list' in the message BODY : See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html : --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line: 'unsubscribe vnc-list' in the message BODY See also: http://www.uk.research.att.com/vnc/intouch.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------
