MSGID: 1:229/426 EF88EDE4   
   REPLY: 7784.binkd@1:103/705 246a4a0e   
   TZUTC: -0500   
   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)