Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:32:33 -0700 From: John E Hein <jhein@timing.com> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: delphij@delphij.net, freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.org, Thomas Mueller <tmueller@sysgo.com> Subject: Re: Xorg vs gettimeofday() and clock_gettime() Message-ID: <18375.10353.816420.456552@gromit.timing.com> In-Reply-To: <200802281607.30178.jkim@FreeBSD.org> References: <47C320DB.70004@delphij.net> <18371.11144.568407.26227@gromit.timing.com> <20080227103210.694787ec@tom.ulm.sysgo.com> <200802281607.30178.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jung-uk Kim wrote at 16:07 -0500 on Feb 28, 2008: > So this test was introduced in the following commit: > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg-commit/2006-November/009390.html > > Google found me this: > > http://www.opengroup.org/austin/mailarchives/ag-review/msg00489.html > > 'The recently-approved 1003.1j-2000 adds CLOCK_MONOTONIC to the list.' > > I think 1003.1b-1993 added clock_gettime(2) and configure.ac tests > bogus spec. I suspect the autoconf test was probably written against the linux time.h which specifies _POSIX_C_SOURCE 199309 for all the CLOCK_* constants. Your quote seems to indicate that is wrong (which makes sense to me since I don't recall the CLOCK_* values around back to 1993). But I have not done the work to dig into the spec. If someone verifies that to be the case, please submit a PR to xorg to fix their autoconf check.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?18375.10353.816420.456552>