"William E. Kempf" wrote:
> Boost.Threads is the only library that needs thread-safe versions of
> Boost.Test *TODAY* (at least that are part of the actual Boost project,
> but Boost.Test is also being used outside of the Boost project, and I
> won't begin to claim that I know they don't need thre
[2003-02-17] Rene Rivera wrote:
>[2003-02-17] Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>
>>> I will try to address 1(without tss) 2 and 4 today.
>>
>>I committed execution_monitor.cpp with changes that should address above
>>issues. We may try now recheck how signal handling behave on OpenBSD
>
>They are running
[2003-02-17] Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>> I will try to address 1(without tss) 2 and 4 today.
>
>I committed execution_monitor.cpp with changes that should address above
>issues. We may try now recheck how signal handling behave on OpenBSD
They are running now, again. Results will take another 1.5
Gennadiy Rozental said:
>> I've been looking at your signal handling implementation in
>>execution_monitor.cpp, and I think I've uncovered quite a few bugs,
>> some of which are really quite fatal for multithreading code.
>
> The code never promised to work in multithreaded environment, nor even
>
> I will try to address 1(without tss) 2 and 4 today.
I committed execution_monitor.cpp with changes that should address above
issues. We may try now recheck how signal handling behave on OpenBSD
Gennadiy.
___
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lis
> I've been looking at your signal handling implementation in
>execution_monitor.cpp, and I think I've uncovered quite a few bugs, some of
>which are really quite fatal for multithreading code.
The code never promised to work in multithreaded environment, nor even to be
thread save. It is in my to
