Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in process-wait

chicken-hackers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in process-wait

From:	Felix
Subject:	Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in process-wait
Date:	Thu, 04 Oct 2012 23:45:25 +0200 (CEST)

Hi!

Both EINTR-related patches have been signed off and pushed.  John's
suggestion might be worth doing - if you agree, go ahead abd make the
necessary changes. I haven't got the time right now to test it.


cheers,
felix

[Prev in Thread]

Current Thread

[Next in Thread]

[Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in getc(), Peter Bex, 2012/10/03
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in process-wait (was: [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in getc()), Peter Bex, 2012/10/03
  - Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in process-wait, Felix <=
    - Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in process-wait, Peter Bex, 2012/10/05
    - Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in process-wait, Christian Kellermann, 2012/10/15
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in getc(), John Cowan, 2012/10/03

Prev by Date: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Remove deprecations
Next by Date: [Chicken-hackers] Making -scrutinize the default?
Previous by thread: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in process-wait (was: [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in getc())
Next by thread: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Handle EINTR properly in process-wait
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread