Re: OpenBSD 4.7 vs nanosleep

2010-10-08 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi Jim, > This isn't a show-stopper for the coreutils release. But it's easy to fix. The bug is actually in the gnulib replacement, which is missing a check on the validity of the argument. 2010-10-08 Bruno Haible nanosleep: Make replacement POSIX compliant. * lib/nanosleep.

Re: OpenBSD 4.7 vs nanosleep

2010-10-08 Thread Jim Meyering
Bruno Haible wrote: > Hi Jim, Hi Bruno, >> This isn't a show-stopper for the coreutils release. > > But it's easy to fix. The bug is actually in the gnulib replacement, which > is missing a check on the validity of the argument. > > > 2010-10-08 Bruno Haible > > nanosleep: Make replaceme

OpenBSD 4.7 vs nanosleep

2010-10-08 Thread Jim Meyering
FYI, In this part of test-nanosleep.c, on OpenBSD 4.7, nanosleep ends up sleeping the 10 seconds before returning 0. Wrong on both counts. It shouldn't sleep at all, and it should have returned -1. int main (void) { struct timespec ts; ts.tv_sec = 10; ts.tv_nsec = -1; errn