Abramo Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > For what it worths my objections are still there. > > I'm strongly convinced that to have poll waiting for something that > cannot happens is a big mistake (also as an optional behaviour).
The poll is waiting on some thread to start the PCM. It is incorrect to say that this "cannot happen". > That apart I'm sure that to make a change in actual behaviour between > rcX and 1.0 is a professional suicide. However it's _your_ professional > suicide so... ;-))) I am an advocate for high standards of compatibility. But, this is not a compatibility issue. The current behavior fails in the case being discussed. At worst, a program that does not work under the current implementation will fail differently after the change. Some argue that the new failure symptom is actually easier to debug, so even this may be an improvement. The proposal permits appropriately programmed applications to do something useful. This behavior conforms to both the letter and spirit of the X/Open standard, as far as I can see. So, I think the change *should* be made, even at this late stage of the release schedule. (votes++) Regards, -- Jack O'Quin Austin, Texas, USA ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
