Current-Users archive

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

Re: bmake inefficiencies

To: "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg%juniper.net@localhost>
Subject: Re: bmake inefficiencies
From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej%me.com@localhost>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2021 06:48:18 -0800


> On Jan 31, 2021, at 12:41 PM, Simon J. Gerraty <sjg%juniper.net@localhost> wrote:
> 
> David Holland <dholland-current%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
>> "static volatile sig_atomic_t reap_children;"
> 
> I chose int (which is what sig_atomic_t is) for portability.

sig_atomic_t has been around for a fairly long time now, and NOT using it has a negative portability impact.

-- thorpej

Follow-Ups:
- Re: bmake inefficiencies
  - From: Simon J. Gerraty

References:
- bmake inefficiencies
  - From: Mateusz Guzik
- Re: bmake inefficiencies
  - From: Roland Illig
- Re: bmake inefficiencies
  - From: Simon J. Gerraty
- Re: bmake inefficiencies
  - From: Simon J. Gerraty
- Re: bmake inefficiencies
  - From: David Holland
- Re: bmake inefficiencies
  - From: Simon J. Gerraty

Prev by Date: Re: Help with libcurses and lynx under NetBSD-9 and -current?
Next by Date: Re: panic: _bus_virt_to_bus for vioif on GCE with GENERIC kernel
Previous by Thread: Re: bmake inefficiencies
Next by Thread: Re: bmake inefficiencies
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index