Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:28:37 -0700 From: John E Hein <jhein@timing.com> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Thomas Mueller <tmueller@sysgo.com>, freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.org, delphij@delphij.net Subject: Re: Xorg vs gettimeofday() and clock_gettime() Message-ID: <18375.38917.136960.524370@gromit.timing.com> In-Reply-To: <200802281714.43057.jkim@FreeBSD.org> References: <47C320DB.70004@delphij.net> <200802281607.30178.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <18375.10353.816420.456552@gromit.timing.com> <200802281714.43057.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jung-uk Kim wrote at 17:14 -0500 on Feb 28, 2008: > On Thursday 28 February 2008 04:32 pm, John E Hein wrote: > > 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. > > I found it from SUSv3: > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/time.h.html > > 'The manifest constant CLOCK_MONOTONIC and the clock_nanosleep() > function are added for alignment with IEEE Std 1003.1j-2000.' I guess it would be neighborly for someone to submit a PR to the linux folks to fix their time.h, too ;)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?18375.38917.136960.524370>