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! --Daniel -- Daniel Richard G. || [email protected] My ASCII-art .sig got a bad case of Times New Roman.
