Re: alarm(3) bug?

["Jeremy C. Reed" <reed%reedmedia.net@localhost>]

On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, enh wrote:

> i was trying to replace bionic's hacked alarm.c with the current
> NetBSD alarm.c, but noticed that you return -1 on error


It has been this way ever since it was introduced before 4.2BSD in 
1983.


> , unlike glibc and bionic, and apparently contrary to POSIX:
> 
>   http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/alarm.html
> 
> "The alarm() function is always successful, and no return value is
> reserved to indicate an error."