Bug#79358: is select still broken on hurd ?

Neal H. Walfield, le Sat 09 Jun 2007 00:29:38 +0200, a écrit : > The theory is that we don't trust the server to honor the timeout: it > may be malicious and trick the client into waiting forever. Or it may be buggued and hung. > However, there are enough ways in which we rely on the server for >

Bug#79358: is select still broken on hurd ?

At Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:15:20 +0200, Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Neal H. Walfield, le Sat 09 Jun 2007 00:29:38 +0200, a écrit : > > The theory is that we don't trust the server to honor the timeout: it > > may be malicious and trick the client into waiting forever. > > Or it may

Bug#79358: is select still broken on hurd ?

Neal H. Walfield, le Sun 10 Jun 2007 15:30:15 +0200, a écrit : > > > However, there are enough ways in which we rely on the server for > > > correct operation that using the Mach timeout mechanism to preempt > > > the server doesn't bring any additional safety. > > > > Mmm, maybe, but is it really

Bug#406619: libc6 [2.5-0exp3] dies on upgrade

This is a followup to Soren's problem http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-glibc@lists.debian.org/msg33650.html I have had the same problem happening to me, two days ago, at an upgrade of the testing version. I followed the advice given here http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-glibc@lists