On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 17:15:09 -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> We do it for other library functions where some part of the
> functionality is implemented with a system call. In other manpages we
> say something like:
>
> The
> .Fn foo
> function may fail and set
> .Va errno
> for any of the errors
Hi Scott,
Scott Cheloha wrote on Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 05:15:09PM -0500:
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 10:37:03AM -0600, Todd C. Miller wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 07:55:00 -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
>>> Still wondering whether we need an Errors section to mention that
>>> sleep(3) can set errno.
On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 10:37:03AM -0600, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 07:55:00 -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >
> > Anyway, updated patch. No mention of SIGALRM or alarm(3) except in
> > the History section.
>
> I think this is OK for now.
>
> > Still wondering
On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 07:55:00 -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> We don't know if it is still in the wild or not.
>
> There are lots of libc implementations. We can't account for all of
> them.
Right. We don't know who is still using a signal or itimer-based
sleep.
> > Being proscriptive in OpenBSD
On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 07:41:47PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Scott Cheloha wrote:
>
> > Given this, I want to tell the reader, roughly:
> >
> > "hey! it's plausible there is a SIGALRM-based sleep() implementation
> > using still floating around out there in the wild. If you find
Scott Cheloha wrote:
> Given this, I want to tell the reader, roughly:
>
> "hey! it's plausible there is a SIGALRM-based sleep() implementation
>using still floating around out there in the wild. If you find one,
>you'll want to avoid using it because there are unfixable
On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 05:21:19PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Scott Cheloha wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 01:35:19PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > This is a lot of fuss.
> > >
> > > How many bugs have you found relating to this issue?
> > >
> > > Let me guess: zero?
> >
> >
Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 01:35:19PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > This is a lot of fuss.
> >
> > How many bugs have you found relating to this issue?
> >
> > Let me guess: zero?
>
> Right, that's why I'm asking if we need to make a portability
> recommendation at all.
On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 01:35:19PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> This is a lot of fuss.
>
> How many bugs have you found relating to this issue?
>
> Let me guess: zero?
Right, that's why I'm asking if we need to make a portability
recommendation at all.
We could also say something like:
On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 02:30:01PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 08:15:34AM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 10:39:49PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > Okay, the nanosleep.2 changes are committed, let's do sleep.3 next.
> >
> > hi.
> >
> > the
This is a lot of fuss.
How many bugs have you found relating to this issue?
Let me guess: zero?
Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 08:15:34AM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 10:39:49PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > Okay, the nanosleep.2 changes are
On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 08:15:34AM +0100, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 10:39:49PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > Okay, the nanosleep.2 changes are committed, let's do sleep.3 next.
>
> hi.
>
> the changes read fine to me. only one comment:
>
> > [...]
> >
> > STANDARDS
> >
On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 10:39:49PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> Okay, the nanosleep.2 changes are committed, let's do sleep.3 next.
>
hi.
the changes read fine to me. only one comment:
> Here's a changelist by section. I have some questions in there at end
> of sections where I'm unsure
On Sat, Jul 24, 2021 at 10:39:49PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> Okay, the nanosleep.2 changes are committed, let's do sleep.3 next.
>
> Here's a changelist by section. I have some questions in there at end
> of sections where I'm unsure about something.
>
> NAME
>
> - This is clunky. Tighten
14 matches
Mail list logo
