Re: bug in OS/2 perproxy build 374?

waldo kitty wrote:

> i can easily understand that... i guess the confusing part was that the missing 
> section was not created as other sections have been done in past versions... i 
> mean, i've never had to create any sections in all the years that i've been 
> running a perproxy... i've edited the ones that were created but i've never had 
> to create them...

it's just impossible. ether you've forgot something, either you've used 
proxyper.ini from distribution archive (it contains all necessary sections).

> actually, i did intentionally remove all sections that were listed as 
> contestclosed=1 to clean up the ini file of all the old unnecessary sections 
> before loading the new 347 build of the perproxy...

i agree that references to old ogr projects can be removed. this is 
minor issue, but still confusing. but since perproxy is usually changing 
only before new projects, don't expect this do be done fast :)

> i don't understand your last statement "not created missed .ini sections 
> automatically and refused to start"??

perproxy will not create missing .ini section. if section is missing, 
perproxy will not start. perproxy worked this way for at least 6 years 
(see timestamp of readme.os2 :)

Roman
_______________________________________________
proxyper mailing list
proxyper-Ra3b/QYEcJ3d140v2zMXi0fjHoOT/h/[email protected]
http://lists.distributed.net/mailman/listinfo/proxyper