Re: sit-for

[Chong Yidong]

>> Another possibility is to leave sit-for as it is, try to find code
>> that relies on sit-for returning due to process output, and fix it.
>
> Richard specifically asked [someone] to check all sit-for calls to see
> if the new behaviour would break them.  So [we] should already have
> done this (but I don't think anybody actually did that).

I did check, but maybe I missed something non-obvious.  The strange
behavior of Gnus reported by David Kastrup seems to indicate that some
code somewhere is relying on some undocumented feature of sit-for.