Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 24 Jan 2000 15:06:26 -0500 (EST)
From:      Mikhail Teterin <>
To:        David Schwartz <>
Cc:, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, bde@FreeBSD.ORG,
Subject:   Re: kern/13644
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <000001bf669f$94c4ec70$> from David Schwartz at "Jan 24, 2000 11:16:57 am"

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
David Schwartz once wrote:

>  The  man page  is  correct  and the  implementation  is correct.

Several people, said the man pages are broken:

		Bruce Evans on Dec 28:
	> If timeout is a  non-nil pointer, it specifies
	> a maximum  interval to wait for  the selection
	> to complete.

	This is a  bug in the man page. It  is so poorly
	worded that  it is broken. "maximum"  here means
	"minimum" in  the case  where no  selected event

		Daniel Eischen on Jan 23:
	You have  to guarantee  that the actual  time is
	greater  than or  equal  to the  amount of  time

		Warner Losh on Jan 23:
	: Could you provide  the chapter/verse number of
	: where POSIX spec contradicts the man pages? It
	: will help  me make my  case on the  TCL forum,
	: since  the  TCL  developers remain  under  the
	: mistaken assumption, that  select() may return
	: earlier, but never later than specified.

	Somewhere in the archives  have a pointer to the
	unified unix spec for select. Might want to look
	for  it. A  useful regular  expression might  be

This is becoming ridiculous. Somehow, I  get a feeling a bunch of people
manage  to agree  with  each other  on a  subject  they express  exactly
opposite opinions.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>