[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software

Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.python

IDLE Won't Start w/o Socket Error--Win XP

wolf_tracks

2/12/2008 8:18:00 PM

After simply trying to write a program with help(MakeQTE), a module, and
having it fail with socket errors, I decided to restart IDLE, thinking I
knew the cause. I'm now getting msgs like: "IDLE's subprocess didn't make
connection. ... firewall may be blocking the connection." I doubt the FW
connection. There's a small X warning dialog that says "Socket Error:
Connection refused." Is there a way to reset IDLE?
--
Wayne Watson (Nevada City, CA)

Web Page: <speckledwithStars.net>
8 Answers

Mike Driscoll

2/12/2008 8:28:00 PM

0

On Feb 12, 2:18 pm, "W. Watson" <wolf_tra...@invalid.com> wrote:
> After simply trying to write a program with help(MakeQTE), a module, and
> having it fail with socket errors, I decided to restart IDLE, thinking I
> knew the cause. I'm now getting msgs like: "IDLE's subprocess didn't make
> connection. ... firewall may be blocking the connection." I doubt the FW
> connection. There's a small X warning dialog that says "Socket Error:
> Connection refused." Is there a way to reset IDLE?
> --
> Wayne Watson (Nevada City, CA)
>
> Web Page: <speckledwithStars.net>

I sometimes get this message when one of my programs fails to shutdown
properly. I program almost exclusively in Windows, so I open Task
Manager and kill all instance of Python.exe to fix this problem. I
have seen ZoneAlarm flag IDLE when I first installed Python, so if you
upgraded it recently, the firewall may be an issue.

Mike

Gabriel Genellina

2/12/2008 9:13:00 PM

0

En Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:18:20 -0200, W. Watson <wolf_tracks@invalid.com>
escribió:

> After simply trying to write a program with help(MakeQTE), a module, and
> having it fail with socket errors, I decided to restart IDLE, thinking I
> knew the cause. I'm now getting msgs like: "IDLE's subprocess didn't make
> connection. ... firewall may be blocking the connection." I doubt the FW
> connection. There's a small X warning dialog that says "Socket Error:
> Connection refused." Is there a way to reset IDLE?

From the IDLE About box:

IDLE executes Python code in a separate process, which is restarted for
each
Run (F5) initiated from an editor window. The environment can also be
restarted from the Shell window without restarting IDLE.

(Personal firewall software may warn about the connection IDLE makes to its
subprocess using this computer's internal loopback interface. This
connection
is not visible on any external interface and no data is sent to or received
from the Internet.)

From the help:

Running without a subprocess:

If IDLE is started with the -n command line switch it will run in a
single process and will not create the subprocess which runs the RPC
Python execution server. This can be useful if Python cannot create
the subprocess or the RPC socket interface on your platform. However,
in this mode user code is not isolated from IDLE itself. Also, the
environment is not restarted when Run/Run Module (F5) is selected. If
your code has been modified, you must reload() the affected modules and
re-import any specific items (e.g. from foo import baz) if the changes
are to take effect. For these reasons, it is preferable to run IDLE
with the default subprocess if at all possible.

--
Gabriel Genellina

wolf_tracks

2/12/2008 9:56:00 PM

0

Thanks. That did the trick.

Mike Driscoll wrote:
> On Feb 12, 2:18 pm, "W. Watson" <wolf_tra...@invalid.com> wrote:
>> After simply trying to write a program with help(MakeQTE), a module, and
>> having it fail with socket errors, I decided to restart IDLE, thinking I
....
>
> I sometimes get this message when one of my programs fails to shutdown
> properly. I program almost exclusively in Windows, so I open Task
> Manager and kill all instance of Python.exe to fix this problem. I
> have seen ZoneAlarm flag IDLE when I first installed Python, so if you
> upgraded it recently, the firewall may be an issue.
>
> Mike

--
Wayne Watson (Nevada City, CA)

Web Page: <speckledwithStars.net>

Jeff

10/17/2011 1:52:00 AM

0

On Oct 16, 8:12 pm, RichL <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 4:44 pm, UsurperTom <Usurper...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 16, 11:23 am, "who?" <yourimageunre...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > > you hold grudges for years.
>
> > I haven't addressed a post by Rich in months. He was the one who
> > brought up my name in this thread when I didn't even post here.
>
> How amusing, Tom!  And ironic, too!
>
> I couldn't help seeing this post in Jeff's response, and I must
> congratulate you on your improving sense of humor.  Oh, and by the
> way, I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that just recently (was it
> earlier today?  Yesterday?) that you were rambling on about my
> supposed David Black fixation!
>
> I bought up your name because the phrase "Yoko sycophant" came up, and
> a quick Google search revealed that you're the phrase's most vigorous
> proponent within RMB.  Do you think that's untrue?
>
> Carry on...

This guy puts his foot in his mouth with nearly every
post he writes.

Fattuchus

10/17/2011 7:22:00 AM

0

On Oct 16, 6:44 pm, Nil <redno...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote:
> On 16 Oct 2011, Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> rec.music.beatles:
>
> > The Beatles have been dead as a band for more than 30 years, yet
> > this NG exists.  People still care about them.
>
> Nice non-sequitur. That's the kind of blindness that allows you to keep
> your Yoko fixation sharp and acid strong year after year.

You are the one who is blind.

Fattuchus

10/17/2011 7:25:00 AM

0

On Oct 16, 7:33 pm, Billy <billybartlet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 12:46 pm, Nil <redno...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote:
>
> > On 16 Oct 2011, Billy <billybartlet...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> > rec.music.beatles:
>
> > > Really?  You don't think there are a few people who never ever
> > > find fault with Yoko, no matter what she does or says?
>
> > No I don't. I asked you to name some of them, but you can't, can you?
>
> > > If that were really the case, I don' t see why the term hits such
> > > a nerve.
>
> > I do. Some people here appreciate common decency. Some people find it
> > quite neurotic that other people spend a large chunk of their lives
> > nursing a hate-on for wife of a rock star who's been dead for more than
> > 30 years.
>
> Yes, and as soon as Lennon was out of the picture, Yoko began bad-
> mouthing him to.the media, while at the same time using her
> association with him to try to sell her own albums and assorted "John
> Lennon" products.  These are facts, not hate.

Applause. Nice to see another poster here sees the light.

I can't understand how someone can be a Beatles fan or a Lennon fan
and not see Yoko for what she is.

There's a saying: all that evil needs to succeed is for good men to
remain silent. Too many here remain silent and even attack the Yoko
critics.

Jeff

10/17/2011 4:47:00 PM

0

On Oct 17, 2:25 am, Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 7:33 pm, Billy <billybartlet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 12:46 pm, Nil <redno...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > On 16 Oct 2011, Billy <billybartlet...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> > > rec.music.beatles:
>
> > > > Really?  You don't think there are a few people who never ever
> > > > find fault with Yoko, no matter what she does or says?
>
> > > No I don't. I asked you to name some of them, but you can't, can you?
>
> > > > If that were really the case, I don' t see why the term hits such
> > > > a nerve.
>
> > > I do. Some people here appreciate common decency. Some people find it
> > > quite neurotic that other people spend a large chunk of their lives
> > > nursing a hate-on for wife of a rock star who's been dead for more than
> > > 30 years.
>
> > Yes, and as soon as Lennon was out of the picture, Yoko began bad-
> > mouthing him to.the media, while at the same time using her
> > association with him to try to sell her own albums and assorted "John
> > Lennon" products.  These are facts, not hate.
>
> Applause.  Nice to see another poster here sees the light.
>
> I can't understand how someone can be a Beatles fan or a Lennon fan
> and not see Yoko for what she is.
>
> There's a saying:  all that evil needs to succeed is for good men to
> remain silent.  Too many here remain silent and even attack the Yoko
> critics.

That saying doesn't apply to Yoko and there is nothing to be
gained by attacking her. She didn't commit a crime.

Donna

10/17/2011 4:55:00 PM

0

On Oct 17, 3:25 am, Fattuchus <fattuc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Applause. Nice to see another poster here sees the light.
>
> I can't understand how someone can be a Beatles fan or a Lennon fan
> and not see Yoko for what she is.

You really can't understand how someone can be a fan? When I think of
The Beatles, Yoko is not part of the equation... well, not usually,
anyway. She really doesn't stand out for me in any way... well, other
than the fact that she was part of May's life and that she's often the
main topic on this newsgroup. My thoughts are basically that she was
John's 2nd wife... she's offbeat... avant-garde... she sings funny...
stuff happened. That's about it for me.


> There's a saying: all that evil needs to succeed is for good men to
> remain silent. Too many here remain silent and even attack the Yoko
> critics.

I always wondered what your goal is here in trying to convince others
that Yoko is so evil. What is it that you want them to feel or to
do? From what you wrote, above, it sounds as if you don't want them
to be silent about it. But is that all you want, or is it something
more? And even if they're vocal about it, what will that accomplish?

In trying to understand this, I can say that, for myself, it was
irritating to read gushing praise for Mrs. Harrison, knowing the
whacky and cruel things that she did which was well-hidden from the
general public. However, they were mostly just brief statements of
mine here, borne out of momentary bursts of frustration when I'd
sometimes read a post from somebody who would say how classy and
wonderful she is, deceived and unaware of many of the facts, some of
which are documented. But I wasn't on a mission to be the one to
expose her or to get the newsgroup or the public to turn on her. My
feeling is that, spiritually, what she does is ultimately between her
and her God, and life plays out just as it should.

And so I feel the same regarding Yoko. Whatever it is that happened,
she will someday have to face whatever it is that she did... and,
again, life played out just as it should. Her personal thought
process, her deeds, and her relationship with John is not necessarily
for outsiders to comprehend or to judge. A lot of it was made public,
however, and you can react to it, but you can't expect others to feel
what you do, or with the same intensity. You have a reason for so
strongly feeling the way you do, and many of us here don't understand
it. And that's okay since you may not fully understand it, yourself.
But it's your thing, not ours. After years of talking about her here,
not much has changed in the way of swaying a lot of posters over to
your point of view. So why go on? And why would the opinion of
others even matter so much to you? What are you looking for them to
do with the information that you present? Really, I'm just curious,
fattuchus. No disrespect intended here.