Re: [PATCH 1/2] run-parallel: rename set_nonblocking to set_nonblocking_or_die

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

 



Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@xxxxxx> writes:

> (Jumping into an old discussion, I may be off topic)

I think this is exactly the latest "I wonder" from Peff, to which I
said "well, perhaps we didn't need nonblock after all from the
beginning".

> And this work regardless if the fd blocking or not, so from that point of view,
> the set_nonblocking() is not needed at all.
>
> The major question is, if the poll() works under Windows, (and I
> haven't found time to dig further)

;-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]