>>>>>>>>Another approach I might look into is using CreateProcess() to run a exe that will take care of the job and using WaitForSingleObject() to wait for the exe to complete the job, this way I'll know if the job was completed or not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Just looking back on your requirements, and thought I might ask: have you looked at wwIPstuff? It does what I think you are trying to do by wrapping Synchronous functions in WinInet.dll. You can send mail directly to an SMTP server...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I think Raul needs WinSock for whatever he's doing...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Logging on to an SMTP server to send mail?
>>>>
>>>>Yes,that's the process.
>>>>I'm doing it this way for two reasons. First, believe it or not, my customer wants everything to be coded by us without using third party controls (doesn't he realize that MSWinsock "is" a third party control?).
>>>>Second I'm not charging much for this so I need to avoid extra costs. :)
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for all your help.
>>>
>>>On a different note (still)-
>>>
>>>Ed- isn't there an Win32 API function that causes a pause? I though I had seen someone post this, but I couldn't find it in my Win32API help file. If so, this could be used to create a DO WHILE loop that didn't suck up processor time (unless of course, this function did a tight loop internally).
>>
>>Yep - Sleep():
>>
>>

DECLARE Sleep IN WIN32API INTEGER dwMilliseconds
>>=Sleep(nTimeToIdleIn Milliseconds)

>
>That was one of the first things I tried. But Sleep() stops everything and the Winsock events don't arrive while in Sleep().

I didn't expect it to work, but Eric asked, so I told him. It suspends the current thread, so it's no surprise that it won't help, since the Winsock control would be running in the same thread as the VFP in-process COM server.