On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 02:14:13PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote: > > Yeah, I was being lazy. There seems to be a little trouble with the > > sleep-as-long-as-we-can patch anyway, I'll see if this isn't too tricky > > to hack up and try submitting it. > Thanks. Please let us know how it turns out; if nanosleep can fail > with EOVERFLOW we'll have to recode things again to work around that > problem. (I hope it doesn't come to that....) Hmm, they've fixed the problem the the capping-the-sleep-time patch, and Thomas Gleixner doesn't seem very eager to accept the patch (not big on solutions to "academic" problems apparantly). I'll CC you on the thread, but suspect you're best of just waiting a little and seeing what ends up in Linus's tree.
-- Frank v Waveren Key fingerprint: BDD7 D61E [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5D39 CF05 4BFC F57A Public key: hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net/468D62C8 FA00 7D51 468D 62C8
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
