Date:Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:20:45 +
From:"Kamil Rytarowski"
Message-ID: <20161103112045.a48aaf...@cvs.netbsd.org>
| This test verifies calling raise(2) with the SIGCONT argument in the child.
| The parent is notified with it and asserts that WIFCONTINUED() and
|
In article <19801.1478175...@andromeda.noi.kre.to>,
Robert Elz wrote:
>
>Which is actually correct? (That is, which makes more sense, if it is
>not actually specified somewhere.)
>
>Please make the tests test correct behaviour, not just what NetBSD happens
>to do today. If NetBSD is doing som
On 03.11.2016 15:24, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <19801.1478175...@andromeda.noi.kre.to>,
> Robert Elz wrote:
>>
>> Which is actually correct? (That is, which makes more sense, if it is
>> not actually specified somewhere.)
>>
>> Please make the tests test correct behaviour, not just wh
