[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bug in nanosleep() implementation for Unix platforms lacking same
|
From: |
Pádraig Brady |
|
Subject: |
Re: Bug in nanosleep() implementation for Unix platforms lacking same |
|
Date: |
Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:54:51 +0100 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 |
On 19/09/15 01:25, Daniel Richard G. wrote:
> On Fri, 2015 Sep 18 09:32+0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>
>> I think the SIGCONT handling is to handle reception of explicit
>> SIGSTOP and SIGCONT
>
> Ah, okay, that makes sense.
>
>>> and even if it did, the nanosleep() implementation would then return
>>> 1 instead of the correct value of -1.
>>
>> Yes that looks incorrect.
>> Perhaps something like this suffices:
>
> Indeed, test-nanosleep now passes for me on both Linux (when using that
> implementation) and the system I'm working on. Thank you for the fix!
Pushed at http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=commitdiff;h=6439a0af
thanks,
Pádraig