Re: [PATCH] compatibility syscall layer (lets try again)

From: Martin Schwidefsky (
Date: Mon Dec 09 2002 - 13:41:41 EST

> You're not looking at a recent 2.5.x tree with the nanosleep() restart
> logic.
I had been looking at 2.5.50, we had a different meaning of current.
If you are saying that for any implementation of nanosleep I have to implement
the -ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK thingy anyway, then I better start with it.

blue skies,

Linux/390 Design & Development, IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH
Schönaicherstr. 220, D-71032 Böblingen, Telefon: 49 - (0)7031 - 16-2247

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 15 2002 - 22:00:15 EST