On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 05:01:26PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > >> > >> Clearly, the page needs amending. However, ideal would be to describe > >> *when* the section became obsolete (which kernel version). Do you or > >> Peter know, or have an idea how we can determine that information? > > > > I don't know. But looking at the git repo, it seems in the first git commit > > (1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2) it was already safe, > > So, some history: CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID and CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID > first appeared in 2.6.12, as far as I know. > > Your suggesting that these clocks were safe in 2.6.12-rc2 (April > 2005). At this point, I'm confused. AFAICT, Christoph wrote his text Ohh, I didn't know that. Now I'm confused too :S > in mid-2004, quite some time before 2.61.12 was released with the > initial CLOCK_THREAD_CPUTIME_ID and CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID > implementations. The thing is, Christoph, is usually pretty sharp, so > I assume that he was talking about something that was true at some > point, but it's unclear to me when that point could have been, since > the timelines don't seem to match up (unless, of course, your > suppositions are wrong, Rodrigo, but I'm not assuming that at this > point). Hmmm, but chances are that I'm wrong I think... =) > > Let's see is Christoph or Peter has something to say. Let's see :) Thanks a lot, Rodrigo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
