Greg.mpls / gmail.com wrote:
> Eric,
> 
> > Hopefully this isn't controversial
> 
> What?  If someone thinks it is, maybe they can volunteer to
> maintain everything you said you'd help with...  Anyway,
> thanks for all the time you've put in already.

I guess that is in response to [Misc #14210] and [Misc #14211]?

*shrug* I assume a lot of people don't like my stance against
proprietary services and my refusal to deal with graphical stuff;
and don't like my work as a result.

Anyways you're welcome :>

> Windows is kind of crashing & burning with the recent changes
> to WEBrick, etc.  I haven't really looked at them, but thought
> the logs might be helpful.  Attached, both have 'retry' info
> above the normal failure summary info.  I'm -0600, so it's
> 23:30...

Oops, I made r61409 to try to fix this.  Hopefully it's OK...

Otherwise we could try to revert both r61409 and r61398 and
add a comment explaining the use of Kernel#open...

I also wonder if IO#reopen would work for you without the "w"
arg.  I know the rb_freopen function is completely different
on Win32, so it's likely there's something strange there...

Maybe @usa can chime in...

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>