Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 24 Jul 1997 02:11:57 -0700
From:      "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
To:        TLiddelow@cybec.com.au (Tim Liddelow)
Cc:        Jason Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov>, freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: bin/4154: wish /bin/sleep handled fractions of a second. 
Message-ID:  <11276.869735517@time.cdrom.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 24 Jul 1997 16:41:47 %2B1000." <33D6F92B.C22DDE54@cybec.com.au> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Pedantic, man!  The new /bin/sleep will handle BOTH formats.  It handles
> a superset of the POSIX spec.  No, it doesn't conform EXACTLY to the
> POSIX spec but it _will_ handle all cases that the original /bin/sleep
> did.  I agree that of course it won't barf and be an error case now if

Erm, you're sorta missing the point.  This is not about upwards
compatibility - this is about taking a BSD script and later trying to
port it to, say, Solaris.  Portability cuts both ways, and there's no
advantage to be gained by turning BSD into a roach motel, where code
can get in but, once "BSD-ized", never leave again.

In this particular case, if you have a script which says something like:

foo
sleep 0.8
bar
sleep 0.9
baz

And you bring it to a non-BSD system, it will not sleep _at all_ since
the other system sees "sleep 0", and that could be bad depending on
what bar and baz do. This is exactly the kind of interoperability
problem that POSIX was intended to try and solve.  Let's not fight it.

					Jordan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?11276.869735517>