Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 14:42:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 14:42:02 -0500 Received: from runyon.cygnus.com ([205.180.230.5]:41433 "EHLO cygnus.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 3 Nov 2000 14:41:54 -0500 To: george@moberg.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Can EINTR be handled the way BSD handles it? -- a plea from a user-land programmer... In-Reply-To: <3A03120A.DFC62AD5@moberg.com> Reply-To: drepper@cygnus.com (Ulrich Drepper) X-fingerprint: BE 3B 21 04 BC 77 AC F0 61 92 E4 CB AC DD B9 5A From: Ulrich Drepper Date: 03 Nov 2000 11:41:42 -0800 In-Reply-To: george@moberg.com's message of "Fri, 03 Nov 2000 14:29:14 -0500" Message-ID: Lines: 11 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (Capitol Reef) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org george@moberg.com writes: > Can we _PLEASE_PLEASE_PLEASE_ not do this anymore and have the kernel do > what BSD does: re-start the interrupted call? This is crap. Returning EINTR is necessary for many applications. -- ---------------. ,-. 1325 Chesapeake Terrace Ulrich Drepper \ ,-------------------' \ Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `------------------------ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/