Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:52:24 +0100 From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@Relay1.Austria.EU.net> To: marino.ladavac@aut.alcatel.at Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Message-ID: <199509261452.AA11607@Relay1.Austria.EU.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----- Transcript of session follows ----- While talking to freefall.freebsd.org: >>> RCPT To:<haclers@freebsd.org> <<< 550 <haclers@freebsd.org>... User unknown 550 <haclers@freebsd.org>... User unknown ----- Recipients of this delivery ----- Bounced, cannot deliver: <haclers@freebsd.org> Sent successfully: <julian@ref.tfs.com> ----- Unsent message follows ----- Received: from aut.alcatel.at (dnisun.aut.alcatel.at) by Relay1.Austria.EU.net with SMTP id AA11601 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <haclers@freebsd.org>); Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:52:24 +0100 Received: from atuhc16 by aut.alcatel.at (4.1/SMI-4.1/AAA-1.29/main) id AA27324; Tue, 26 Sep 95 15:49:25 +0100 Message-Id: <9509261449.AA27324@atuhc16.aut.alcatel.at> Received: by atuhc16 (1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA11063; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:52:27 +0100 From: marino.ladavac@aut.alcatel.at Subject: Re: Whither wait_t? To: julian@ref.tfs.com (Julian Elischer) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 95 15:52:26 MET Cc: haclers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199509240527.WAA04774@ref.tfs.com>; from "Julian Elischer" at Sep 23, 95 10:27 pm Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] > hmm looking at osf/1 > (the closet thing to posix I've ever seen......) > #ifdef _POSIX_SOURCE > /* > * If the user defines _BSD, they are obviously not looking for > * POSIX definitions with respect to wait, so give 'em the BSD > * interface. > * > */ > #ifndef _KERNEL > #ifndef _BSD /* POSIX definition of wait() */ > #ifdef _NO_PROTO > extern pid_t wait(); > #else > extern pid_t wait(int *); > #endif /* _NO_PROTO */ > #endif /* _BSD */ > ..... > #endif /*_POSIX_SOURCE*/ > and further down > /* > * Use of this union is deprecated > */ > union wait > { > but no definition of wait_t > > > > Shouldn't it be defined in sys/wait.h? Not in 2.1! :-( > > > > What's our evil friend POSIX say? > I don't think POSIX has ever heard of wait_t > (BTW what IS it?. it's not in 2.0.5 either..) I could imagine it being a union of an int and a couple of bitfields (one for signal, one for return value, one for Mommy, one for Daddy ...) Apparently, POSIX doesn't know about it. /Alby > > > > Jordan > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509261452.AA11607>