Thu Jul 21 18:51:00 GMT 2011
On Thu, 2011-07-21 at 12:37 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Given our current discussion to change cancelable_wait, does it make
> sense to review this patch?
No, the cancelable_wait changes need to go first.
> AFAICs the clock_nanosleep function will have to be changes quite a bit, right?
> Something else occured to me, but I think we should do this in an extra
> step, if at all. IMO the family of sleep functions should be moved out
> of signal.cc into times.cc. It just seems to belong there.
I'm not sure what the gain would be.
More information about the Cygwin-patches