clipka wrote:
> Warp schrieb:
> 
>>   I suppose that would work, at least assuming that a process never 
>> releasing
>> a resource is not included in the definition of "deadlock".
> 
> If you have a process that never releases a resource, then you're 
> somewhat screwed anyway...

Not really. It could be livelock, with all else outside of the resource 
locking/reservation/management subsystem being correct.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message