[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS |
Date: |
04 Sep 2003 11:41:30 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 |
Ian Lance Taylor <address@hidden> writes:
> What is the logic behind obsoleting AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS in
> current versions of autoconf? I searched the mailing lists at
> gnu.org
Here's the announcement of that change:
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-autoconf/2001-06/msg00042.html
Short summary: I surveyed uses of AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS in GNU
code, and found only one use (in Bash), and it was used incorrectly.
I therefore concluded AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS was not needed any
more, and (worse) that it was confusing Autoconf users.
> The manual, and the program, suggest using sigaction with SA_RESTART.
> This is obviously useless. Firstly not every system supports
> SA_RESTART
Which systems don't? That info would be good to add to the manual.
> AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS is for systems which do not provide
> sigaction.
That part of the manual gives advice to people writing new code, and I
think it's safe to assume SA_RESTART in newly written code. Many GNU
programs do that now, to no ill effect that I know of. If I'm wrong,
though, I'd like to fix the manual.
AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS is still in autoconf, so nothing has been
broken (yet :-). If people still need it for something, we'll keep it.
- AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS, Ian Lance Taylor, 2003/09/03
- Re: AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS, Harlan Stenn, 2003/09/03
- Re: AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS, Ian Lance Taylor, 2003/09/06
- Re: AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS, Paul Eggert, 2003/09/07
- Re: AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS, Harlan Stenn, 2003/09/07
- Re: AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS, Ian Lance Taylor, 2003/09/07
- Re: AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS, Paul Eggert, 2003/09/07
- Re: AC_SYS_RESTARTABLE_SYSCALLS, Ian Lance Taylor, 2003/09/07