Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 11:34:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu> To: Shawn Leas <sleas@ixion.honeywell.com> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Annoyance, gripe, whatever Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.03.9904211134280.27954-100000@resnet.uoregon.edu> In-Reply-To: <19990420165806.A13395@ixion.honeywell.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Shawn Leas wrote: > On Tue, Apr 20, 1999 at 02:37:17PM -0700, Doug White wrote: > > > > Failing builds aren't normal, but the -current tree has unusual bootstrap > > requirements. > > Failing builds I can handle, but kill -STOP stopped the make processes, > but then -CONTing the make processes made them quietly give up. > > The build would have succeeded. I was just wondering about the > signal handling of make, or, if it might be something else. I > thought make would simply resume where it was STOPped when I > CONTed it. I don't know. Most people don't suspend background makes. Doug White Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | www.freebsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.03.9904211134280.27954-100000>