From: Joachim Schmitz <jojo@schmitz-digital.de>
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 18:29:01 GMT
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] Support for setitimer() on platforms lacking it
Message-ID: <004701cd8d26$a7710cd0$f6532670$@schmitz-digital.de>
In-Reply-To: <7va9x1zszj.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

> From: Junio C Hamano [mailto:gitster@pobox.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 6:41 PM
> To: Joachim Schmitz
> Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Support for setitimer() on platforms lacking it
> 
> "Joachim Schmitz" <jojo@schmitz-digital.de> writes:
> 
> > HP NonStop (currently) doesn't have setitimer(). The previous attempt of an
> > emulation (reverted by this commit) was not a real substitute for a recurring
> > itimer (as here we also don't have SA_RESTART, so can't re-arm the timer).
> > As setitimer() is only used in cases of perceived latency and it doesn't affect
> > correctness, it now gets disabled entirely, if NO_SETITIMER is set.
> > HP NonStop does provide struct itimerval, but other platforms may not, so this
> > is taken care of in this commit too, by setting NO_STRUCT_ITIMERVAL.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Joachim Schmitz <jojo@schmitz-digital.de>
> 
> The end-result looks simple and nice (thanks for NO_STRUCT_ITIMERVAL).
> 
> As we are not going to include the earlier failed attempt in our
> longer-term history (i.e. 'master', that never rewinds), however,
> I would prefer to see a replacement patch (as opposed to this one
> that incrementally updates the previous failed attempt).  I could
> squash this into the previous one myself though ;-)

Yes, please ;-)

Bye, Jojo