From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 16 12:59:21 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BBA916A404 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 12:59:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from antinvidia@gmail.com) Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com (nz-out-0506.google.com [64.233.162.230]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85F0E13C4B8 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 12:59:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from antinvidia@gmail.com) Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s1so583809nze for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 05:59:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=EnhIMX59Vcl9SrvSMDFjMWUomFAS36l1mC2cP2AlvPUDLtXBCb1RtSjLbDlKJ6/aSPqJoSvoM7MQLgzaE6P38shPcTi5jp03JkcQ1cOqsm2cUP0YjXA/wdhqMsOwskNO999svzONXXZgwwbImkGaN5QHU8vqL7svRWkpoe8hMXo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=ALMAUv4jQQej9k8SafTSU6vNu1I2fh+DcTuwldoZ5+R+2ZWZLB3R07e/rtRh3SjnIVTyBu8kviicfOLURqZsxpK3Q/EjeYbv2SRd0m0kx0MF8D0mfcLfidhB9bCJ5lId7w3DSNejHyaIaLnPgbZ5nbM4FMOzXAKBguzSEX5K3ho= Received: by 10.114.166.1 with SMTP id o1mr2141057wae.1179320359195; Wed, 16 May 2007 05:59:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.54.2 with HTTP; Wed, 16 May 2007 05:59:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 20:59:19 +0800 From: MQ To: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=" , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <86wszah2ua.fsf@dwp.des.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <86odknqvf3.fsf@dwp.des.no> <86wszah2ua.fsf@dwp.des.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Subject: Re: A problem with the select(2) interface X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 12:59:21 -0000 2007/5/15, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav : > > MQ writes: > > After all, I don't think this is a real problem with the first > condition. So is > > there any other reasons that we should not add the qualifier? Actually, > what I > > was anxious about is that there is some rules that ask the committers t= o > follow > > the standards stringently. If adjusting the type is impossible, shall w= e > add > > some comments in the man page to reflect that we do not write to the > address? > > It already has this: > > BUGS > Version 2 of the Single UNIX Specification (``SUSv2'') allows system= s > to > modify the original timeout in place. Thus, it is unwise to assume > that > the timeout value will be unmodified by the select() system call. > > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no > No, that is not what I want. I think we'd better add a comments that we *DO NOT WRITE TO THAT ADDRESS*, what the manual describes is that there may be some platforms which write to that address. It's not the same thing.