[Lazarus] UniqueInstance issue

[Giuliano Colla]

Luiz Americo Pereira Camara ha scritto:
> On 3/4/2011 08:17, Giuliano Colla wrote:
>> Luiz Americo Pereira Camara ha scritto:
>>> On 2/4/2011 15:18, Giuliano Colla wrote:
>>>> In an application I'm currently developing, meant to run under RHEL5, I
>>>> needed to ensure that no multiple instances were running, so I 
>>>> installed
>>>> the UniqueInstance component:
>>>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/lazarus-ccr/files/Unique%20Instance/Unique%20Instance%200.2/ 
>>>>
>>>
>>> please publish a sample project and a stacktrace
>>>
>> To avoid attachment length problems, my zipped sandbox folder is 
>> available at:
>>
>> http://www.copeca.it/colla/Sandbox.zip
>>
>> where you can find project1 and project2, to help sort out the 
>> problems, together with Trace1.txt and Trace2.txt, which are the stack 
>> traces for project1 and project2.
>>
>> Project1 is nothing but a form with only a TUniqueInstance component. 
>> If the component is enabled at design time, it works perfectly. If the 
>> component is not enabled at design time, see Trace1.txt. (stack trace 
>> of the first and only instance running)
>>
>> In Project2 I tried to put in one by one all the components of my real 
>> application. Apparently the problem arises with the TMemo component, 
>> whose presence, together with TUniqueInstance, triggers the access 
>> violation (see Trace2.txt, which is the trace of the second instance 
>> running). A TMemo issue or a TUiniqueInstance issue?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I fixed the issue on svn.
> 
> There's one issue pending that i'm working on it. See comments of 
> http://lazarusroad.blogspot.com/2006/12/only-one-instance.html
> 

Thanks, I'll get the svn and try to backport the fix to my Lazarus version.
If I come out with a good idea, I'll submit it for the pending issue. If
not, I'll patiently wait for someone brighter than me to find the
solution...


-- 
Giuliano Colla

Whenever people agree with me, I always feel I must be wrong (O. Wilde)