Hello! This one is misconfigured in a really funny way. I get a bounce not if I post to the OpenBSD mailing lists (as it happens sometimes) but if I *get* a mail both with To my address and CC an OpenBSD mailing list.
Mailing to [EMAIL PROTECTED] didn't work either (similar "loop" error message). So could one please remove [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the mailing lists? Sorry for mailing the list itself, but I didn't find a more specific contact for that on http://www.openbsd.org/mail.html. And I didn't find the mail exchanges from when I last reported a misconfigured subscriber. Thanks in advance. Kind regards, Hannah. ----- Forwarded message from Mail Delivery System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- From: Mail Delivery System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 00:30:43 +0200 (EET) Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender Content-Description: Notification This is the Postfix program at host aries.oic.lv. I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below. For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster> If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message. The Postfix program <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: host 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1] said: 554 5.4.6 Loop detected. (in reply to end of DATA command) Content-Description: Delivery report Reporting-MTA: dns; aries.oic.lv X-Postfix-Queue-ID: 2EBC123476 X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Arrival-Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 00:30:43 +0200 (EET) Final-Recipient: rfc822; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1] said: 554 5.4.6 Loop detected. (in reply to end of DATA command) Content-Description: Undelivered Message From: Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Hannah Schroeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 23:21:08 +0100 (MET) Subject: Re: Strange pthread/kernel interaction cc: [email protected] >>I have found out that when linking a userspace application with -lpthread, >>then for some reason, a device driver's read() routine suddenly has >>IO_NDELAY set in flags. Bug? > >No. This is as it should be, because -lpthread does threads in *one* >kernel process, so it has to intercept blocking operations so it can >switch to another thread instead, or call select/poll/kevent if needed, >so not all threads hang if *one* executes a blocking operation. > Reminds me of ol' LinuxThreads. Any plans to make each thread a separate kernel process/thread? Jan Engelhardt -- ----- End forwarded message -----
