From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Mar 24 9:31:45 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from gershwin.tera.com (unknown [207.224.230.28]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEA6815294 for ; Wed, 24 Mar 1999 09:31:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kline@tao.thought.org) Received: from tao.thought.org (tao.tera.com [207.108.223.55]) by gershwin.tera.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA21179 for ; Wed, 24 Mar 1999 09:31:18 -0800 (PST) Received: (from kline@localhost) by tao.thought.org (8.8.8/8.7.3) id JAA12620 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Wed, 24 Mar 1999 09:31:06 -0800 (PST) From: Gary Kline Message-Id: <199903241731.JAA12620@tao.thought.org> Subject: xflame missing nanosleep in 2.2.8 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org (FreeBSD Ports) Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 09:31:06 -0800 (PST) Organization: <> thought.org: public service Unix since 1986... <> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL32 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Does anybody know if we are missing a nanosleep() library call in FBSD-2.2.8? Is this in 3.X, or is nanosleep() a Linuxism? A new X11R6 addition? I thought it'd be relaxing to have my own v-fireplace to pop up when I needed a break, but xflame is a huge CPU-sink, so nope. But still curious about nanosleep(). Thanks for any light here, gary -- Gary D. Kline kline@tao.thought.org Public service uNix To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message