Date: Tue, 07 Nov 1995 22:19:51 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org, jehamby@lightside.com, x_cbug@netscape.com Subject: Re: Timing bug with Netscape 2.0b2 Message-ID: <3348.815811591@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 07 Nov 1995 22:53:27 MST." <199511080553.WAA19389@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Look at the state of system call restart after SIGALRM on setitimer() > for BSDI vs. FreeBSD in BSDI compatability mode. If they're using setitimer() instead of a timeout to select(), that'd be unbelievably mutant. What makes you think they're doing it that way? Signal handling in X applications is something to be avoided, not embraced. I've done "blinking" just fine with the supplied (non-signal using) timers in other applications. [Note: We should probably take x_cbug out of the Cc line if this is going to turn into a debate! :)] Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3348.815811591>