On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 04:50:27PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > Todd C. Miller <mill...@openbsd.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, 01 Jul 2021 00:14:12 +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > > > > Can the current wording below CAVEATS, "confusing behavior", be made > > > more precise, explaining what actually happens rather than merely > > > calling it "confusing"? For example, saying that they all override > > > each other or something like that? Or saying that behavior is > > > undefined when more than one of them is used (isn't that what POSIX > > > says)? > > > > Yes, POSIX says interactions between them are unspecified. > > Maybe something like this -- telling people what actually happens > > 1) makes them aware A uses B > > 2) explains the mechanism instead of vague handwaving > > .Sh DESCRIPTION > -.Bf -symbolic > -This is a simplified interface to > -.Xr setitimer 2 . > -.Ef > +.Fn alarm > +is a simple interface using the > +.Va ITIMER_REAL > +timer with > +.Xr settimer 2 . > > ualarm needs a more careful description, maybe starting with this. > > .Sh DESCRIPTION > -.Bf -symbolic > -This is a simplified interface to > -.Xr setitimer 2 . > -.Ef > +.Fn ualarm > +is a simple interface using the > +.Va ITIMER_REAL > +timer with > +.Xr settimer 2 . > +Exceedingly large timing arguments are succeptable to truncation. > > Rough warning feels like it is enough.
Do you mean truncation or overflow?
