On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:41 AM, François Poulain <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks. I quickly grepped the code, there is only a few occurrences of > usleep. It will be easy. If you need some help, don't hesitate to ask. > Even though using nanosleep() would be better, given that usleep() is deprecated and all, I've now seen that this wouldn't help much, since it is per specification non-blocking (suspends the thread). So, the problem lies almost surely somewhere else (=> I won't invest time in the usleep->nanosleep conversion) Besides, there seem to be some subtleties related to handling of signals by nanosleep which I don't really want to read about now: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17118105/replace-usleep-with-nanosleep Or maybe they aren't relevant at all... Best, -- Miguel de Benito.
_______________________________________________ Texmacs-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
