From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Sep 23 22:27:21 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id WAA01463
          for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 23 Sep 1995 22:27:21 -0700
Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id WAA01454
          ; Sat, 23 Sep 1995 22:27:18 -0700
Received: (from julian@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id WAA04774; Sat, 23 Sep 1995 22:27:06 -0700
From: Julian Elischer <julian@ref.tfs.com>
Message-Id: <199509240527.WAA04774@ref.tfs.com>
Subject: Re: Whither wait_t?
To: jkh@freefall.freebsd.org (Jordan K. Hubbard)
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 22:27:06 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: hackers@freefall.freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199509232157.OAA03165@freefall.freebsd.org> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Sep 23, 95 02:57:41 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 780       
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

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..)
> 
> 					Jordan
>