From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Dec 10 10:43:39 1996
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id KAA21075
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 10 Dec 1996 10:43:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id KAA21068
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 1996 10:43:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id LAA04533; Tue, 10 Dec 1996 11:22:25 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199612101822.LAA04533@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: poll(2)
To: jb@cimlogic.com.au (John Birrell)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 11:22:25 -0700 (MST)
Cc: thorpej@nas.nasa.gov, jb@cimlogic.com.au, terry@lambert.org,
        hackers@freebsd.org, tech-kern@netbsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199612100115.MAA11043@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au> from "John Birrell" at Dec 10, 96 12:15:58 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > "Discuss." :-)
> 
> If NetBSD's kernel is moving towards everything being done in timespecs,
> then the best that the real kernel *should* offer would be a nanopoll
> syscall with a timespec argument. Then libc could provide wrappers for
> poll(2) and upoll(2).

poll(3) and upoll(2).

also select(3) and nselect(3).


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.