Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 02:14:42 +0400 (MSD) From: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: sos@sos.freebsd.dk, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: siginterrupt (was Re: Error in sleep !) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970813021100.848A-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net> In-Reply-To: <199708122200.PAA07903@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 12 Aug 1997, Terry Lambert wrote: > The claim is that FreeBSD defaults have been brought into concordance > with POSIX. And the man pages have not been updated. What POSIX says exactly about siginterrupt(3) and restartable syscalls? I can't check this section right now... > To the original poster: > > The system call restart of a sleep(3) does *not* guarantee that the > elapsed time is subtracted from the argument when the restart is > initiated (ie: if you sleep for 2 of 3 seconds, get a signal, and > restart, the restart will likely be for another 3 seconds -- not > the remaining 1). So depending on this behaviour is probably an > error, in any case. I still not understand why you decide to connect restartable syscalls with sleep(3) implementation. Both old and new sleep(3) variants not depends on restartable syscalls. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@null.net> http://www.nagual.pp.ru/~ache/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970813021100.848A-100000>