Re: return value of getitimer after an alarm

2019-02-24 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 24 08:57, Mike Gran via cygwin wrote: > On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 10:18:58AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Feb 23 22:58, Mike Gran via cygwin wrote: > > > Hi- > > > > > > There is an unusual behaviour with setitimer/getitimer and I'm not > > > sure if it is a bug or not. > > > > > >

Re: return value of getitimer after an alarm

2019-02-24 Thread Mike Gran via cygwin
On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 10:18:58AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Feb 23 22:58, Mike Gran via cygwin wrote: > > Hi- > > > > There is an unusual behaviour with setitimer/getitimer and I'm not > > sure if it is a bug or not. > > > > Basically, if I call setitimer to set an SIGALRM, and then ca

Re: return value of getitimer after an alarm

2019-02-24 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Feb 23 22:58, Mike Gran via cygwin wrote: > Hi- > > There is an unusual behaviour with setitimer/getitimer and I'm not > sure if it is a bug or not. > > Basically, if I call setitimer to set an SIGALRM, and then call > getitimer *after* the alarm goes off, I rather expect the time I > receive

return value of getitimer after an alarm

2019-02-23 Thread Mike Gran via cygwin
Hi- There is an unusual behaviour with setitimer/getitimer and I'm not sure if it is a bug or not. Basically, if I call setitimer to set an SIGALRM, and then call getitimer *after* the alarm goes off, I rather expect the time I receive from getitimer should be {tv_sec = 0, tv_usec = 0}, but, in f