From owner-freebsd-bugs Mon Dec 27 22: 4:29 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D54614C37; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 22:04:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au) Received: from bde.zeta.org.au (beefcake.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.12]) by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA30916; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:04:07 +1100 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 17:03:47 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-Sender: bde@alphplex.bde.org To: Mikhail Teterin Cc: jasone@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG, FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG, lawlopez@cisco.com, jseger@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kern/13644 In-Reply-To: <199912280449.XAA78153@rtfm.newton> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > Bruce Evans once stated: > > =On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > => This is NOT what the man page states: > => > => 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. > > The Solaris man-page says the same (man -s 3c select): > > If timeout is not a NULL pointer, it specifies a maximum > interval to wait for the selection to complete. > > And Linux (man 2 select): > > timeout is an upper bound on the amount of time elapsed > before select returns. > > Are both of them wrong too?.. I'm sure TCL developers saw more selects Yes. The Linux one is completely broken, since it appaers to guarantee a maximum time before the _return_. Only very fast hard realtime systems can guarantee that anything happens in an interval of 1us. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message