Message-ID: <41C9CFAE.6060208@clanganke.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <E1ChASX-0004bL-00@pop-a065c28.pas.sa.earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <E1ChASX-0004bL-00@pop-a065c28.pas.sa.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date:  Wed, 22 Dec 2004 20:49:02 +0100
Sender: os2-wireless_users-owner <os2-wireless_users-owner@2rosenthals.com>
Reply-To: os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com
From:  Christian Langanke <os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com>
To:  os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com
Subject: [OS2Wireless] No properties notebook (was Jacaranda for dummies)

Steven Levine wrote:

>>Neither the widget
>>nor the standalone allow me to open the properties
>>notebook.
>>    
>>
>
>I don't know if you can run them both at the same time.  There might be a
>resource conflict.  This is a question for Christian.
>
True. The instance showing the stop sign also gives the appropriate 
error message over the tooltip text. I thought the stop sifgn and the 
text both are good enough to indicate an error...

 It is indeed a resource conflict, both concerning the hardware as well 
as properties and connection profiles data.

Concerning the data, if two instances could access these resources at a 
time,  the data could be written from two instances concurrently, where 
one instance would easily overwrite the date of the other. There could 
be a solution for that, namely locking both property and profile data 
(the latter per active or currently profile, giving further 
complications), this would be a major change.

Concerning the hardware, two instances running at a time could either 
show the status for the same piece of hardware, or run two different 
wireless devices over different drivers (else this cannot work!).

So the real use cases would be either to

a) run two wireless devices (only possible over two different drivers 
!!!) at a time. I doubt that this makes much sense, if any.

b) serialize access to the data just to be able to run two instances at 
a time where both reflect the very same state of the same hardware. This 
is not of much value as in normal operation  you simply need only one 
monitor.

So I currently see no reason to code a concurrent access for two instances.
 

bye, Christian

-------------------------------------------------

Christian Langanke
COS2E & CWSE
Team OS/2 Ruhr e.V.
cla@clanganke.de



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
steward@2rosenthals.com with the command
"unsubscribe os2-wireless_users" in the body
(omit the quotes).

For help with other commands, send a message
to steward@2rosenthals.com with the command
"help" in the body (omit the quotes).

This list is hosted by Rosenthal & Rosenthal
P.O. Box 281, Deer Park, NY 11729-0281. Non-
electronic communications related to content
contained in these messages should be directed
to the above address. (CAN-SPAM Act of 2003)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=