Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:52:24 +0100 From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@Relay1.Austria.EU.net> To: marino.ladavac@aut.alcatel.at Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Message-ID: <199509261452.AA11607@Relay1.Austria.EU.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----- Transcript of session follows -----
While talking to freefall.freebsd.org:
>>> RCPT To:<haclers@freebsd.org>
<<< 550 <haclers@freebsd.org>... User unknown
550 <haclers@freebsd.org>... User unknown
----- Recipients of this delivery -----
Bounced, cannot deliver:
<haclers@freebsd.org>
Sent successfully:
<julian@ref.tfs.com>
----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: from aut.alcatel.at (dnisun.aut.alcatel.at) by Relay1.Austria.EU.net with SMTP id AA11601
(5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <haclers@freebsd.org>); Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:52:24 +0100
Received: from atuhc16 by aut.alcatel.at (4.1/SMI-4.1/AAA-1.29/main)
id AA27324; Tue, 26 Sep 95 15:49:25 +0100
Message-Id: <9509261449.AA27324@atuhc16.aut.alcatel.at>
Received: by atuhc16
(1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA11063; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:52:27 +0100
From: marino.ladavac@aut.alcatel.at
Subject: Re: Whither wait_t?
To: julian@ref.tfs.com (Julian Elischer)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 95 15:52:26 MET
Cc: haclers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199509240527.WAA04774@ref.tfs.com>; from "Julian Elischer" at Sep 23, 95 10:27 pm
Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85]
> hmm looking at osf/1
> (the closet thing to posix I've ever seen......)
> #ifdef _POSIX_SOURCE
> /*
> * If the user defines _BSD, they are obviously not looking for
> * POSIX definitions with respect to wait, so give 'em the BSD
> * interface.
> *
> */
> #ifndef _KERNEL
> #ifndef _BSD /* POSIX definition of wait() */
> #ifdef _NO_PROTO
> extern pid_t wait();
> #else
> extern pid_t wait(int *);
> #endif /* _NO_PROTO */
> #endif /* _BSD */
> .....
> #endif /*_POSIX_SOURCE*/
> and further down
> /*
> * Use of this union is deprecated
> */
> union wait
> {
> but no definition of wait_t
> >
> > Shouldn't it be defined in sys/wait.h? Not in 2.1! :-(
> >
> > What's our evil friend POSIX say?
> I don't think POSIX has ever heard of wait_t
> (BTW what IS it?. it's not in 2.0.5 either..)
I could imagine it being a union of an int and a couple of bitfields
(one for signal, one for return value, one for Mommy, one for Daddy ...)
Apparently, POSIX doesn't know about it.
/Alby
> >
> > Jordan
> >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509261452.AA11607>