This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> writes: |> Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes: |> |> > 2002-02-28 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> |> > |> > * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/nice.c: New file. |> > |> > --- libc/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/nice.c.jj Thu Feb 28 23:12:51 2002 |> > +++ libc/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/nice.c Thu Feb 28 23:15:06 2002 |> > @@ -0,0 +1 @@ |> > +#include <sysdeps/unix/nice.c> |> |> Why do you want to avoid using the nice() syscall? If the syscall is |> returning the wrong value this can be fixed. But using |> getpriority/setpriority seems not the smartest thing to do. You have to resort to getpriority anyway to fix nice. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE GmbH, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |