«

> 4. The fact that you have a .pyc file instead of a .py
> file very likely has *nothing* to do with any threading
> problem you are facing, so I suggest you get past that mental
> block and look elsewhere.

Well, I tried to make it clear that the ONLY difference between
working and not working was the pnetx.pyc when imported did not
work when
#!/usr/bin/python
# pnet.py, exists only to import pnetx.py
import pnetx.py

Otherwise the program has worked fine for months.
I don't think its a mental block, its the ONLY difference.
It freezes on the following statement:
mq = Queue(0)
and I haven't a clue why. All the other threads continue to run.

> 5. Sorry I can't be more help. You don't give anyone much
> to go on. All that stuff about "Queue(0)" and "listenq"
> is pretty much meaningless to us, you know...

You know, I get this all the time on language support groups.
All of my Linux support groups, if they don't understand, say
why and ask for elaboration. I tried to explain what was going on,
without incuding the source. I have about 200 man hours in the source
and I bet it would take longer to understand it.
If my explanation was insufficient, I'm sorry.

ALSO, you did not respond to my email, so I didn't know how to reply.
There is nothing on the archives page which gives me a clue as to
how to respond.

SO, if there is ZERO chance there is some sort of inadvertent lock
occuring in saved byte code, I just kludge around and move on.
Maybe 2.4

Thanks.

phil wrote:
> You know, I get this all the time on language support groups.
> All of my Linux support groups, if they don't understand, say
> why and ask for elaboration.

Wow, amazing! Imagine that... asking for elaboration when
someone posts unclear confusing questions and extraneous
information. The noive!

I also find it remarkable that so many different people are
all doing the same thing to you. It must be a conspiracy.
Certainly not a problem with, say, you...

phil wrote:

[...]
>
> > 5. Sorry I can't be more help. You don't give anyone much
> > to go on. All that stuff about "Queue(0)" and "listenq"
> > is pretty much meaningless to us, you know...
>
> You know, I get this all the time on language support groups.

This might be a clue.

> All of my Linux support groups, if they don't understand, say
> why and ask for elaboration. I tried to explain what was going on,
> without incuding the source. I have about 200 man hours in the source
> and I bet it would take longer to understand it.
> If my explanation was insufficient, I'm sorry.
>
It *was* pretty sketchy. Basically you shouldn't expect people to debug
code they can't see. There are some very able programmers active on this
newsgroup, but their psychic abilities are limited

> ALSO, you did not respond to my email, so I didn't know how to reply.
> There is nothing on the archives page which gives me a clue as to
> how to respond.
>
Once yo post in the newsgroup (or mailing list) then use of the same
channel is advisable.

> SO, if there is ZERO chance there is some sort of inadvertent lock
> occuring in saved byte code, I just kludge around and move on.
> Maybe 2.4
>
If you suspect the problem is a bug in Python then you might consider
searching the bugs database on sourceforge. If nobody's reported a bug
then you are being very optimistic assuming that migrating to 2.4 will
fix the problem.

> Thanks.
>
>

regards
Steve
--
http://www.holdenweb.com
http://pydish.holdenweb.com
Holden Web LLC +1 800 494 3119