From owner-freebsd-current Thu Oct 15 09:15:47 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA14606 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:15:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from highwind.com (hurricane.highwind.com [209.61.45.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA14600 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 09:15:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from info@highwind.com) Received: (from info@localhost) by highwind.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) id MAA25672; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:14:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:14:53 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199810151614.MAA25672@highwind.com> From: HighWind Software Information To: lists@tar.com CC: current@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: <199810151331.IAA25456@ns.tar.com> (lists@tar.com) Subject: Re: Recent 3.0's are Depressing Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hmm.. I ran your test program and it works ok here. It blocks for 15 seconds, and pthread_cond_timewait returns ETIMEDOUT. I'm not running the most current kernel and system, but I did update libc_r to -current as of yesterday. dick@ns$ uname -a FreeBSD ns.tar.com 3.0-BETA FreeBSD 3.0-BETA #15: Sat Sep 26 11:33:35 CDT 1998 This makes me worry: Both of us are on the "latest" libc_r and we see different results. Statically linking an old libc_r into the application didn't fix the problem. This makes me think it isn't "libc_r". Any of the kernel folks or more knowledgable folks get a chance to try that program on the latest/greatest kernel + latest/greatest libc_r? -Rob To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message