From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Dec 29 16:43:57 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from scientia.demon.co.uk (scientia.demon.co.uk [212.228.14.13])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03F4914C9A
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 16:43:55 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from ben@scientia.demon.co.uk)
Received: from strontium.scientia.demon.co.uk ([192.168.91.36] ident=ben)
	by scientia.demon.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.092 #1)
	id 123TgI-000EJG-00; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:43:06 +0000
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:43:06 +0000
From: Ben Smithurst <ben@scientia.demon.co.uk>
To: Daniel O'Connor <doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
Cc: Ken Bolingbroke <hacker@bolingbroke.com>,
	freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, Steffen Merkel <d_f0rce@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: Sorry, but another thread problem!
Message-ID: <19991230004306.B52554@strontium.scientia.demon.co.uk>
References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9912291210510.64465-100000@fremont.bolingbroke.com> <XFMail.991230110857.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.991230110857.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Daniel O'Connor wrote:

> On 29-Dec-99 Ken Bolingbroke wrote:
>>  From my own experience, altho I'm not that skilled a programmer,
>>  sleep()
>>  is not thread-safe.  I believe sleep() sets a global SIGALARM, which
>>  is
>>  reset by every thread that calls it, and thus only the last one ever
>>  returns.  Replacing sleep() with nanosleep() or something else that
>>  is
>>  thread-safe should solve that problem.
> 
> Stupid question time..
> 
> If that is so why doesn't sleep just use nanosleep? :)

It does in FreeBSD. UTSL.

-- 
Ben Smithurst            | PGP: 0x99392F7D
ben@scientia.demon.co.uk |   key available from keyservers and
                         |   ben+pgp@scientia.demon.co.uk


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message