Hi,

At Wed, 6 Nov 2002 13:50:08 +0900,
Jos Backus wrote:
> Meanwhile I intend to use the following patch (against today's HEAD).  An
> earlier version saved the original mask, blocked SIGVTALRM, called fwrite(),
> then restored the original mask, but this seems to be safe enough.  Can
> anybody see anything wrong with it?

Well, your patch makes thread switch impossible while writing
to non-blocking IO, doesn't it?  I suspect it's an acceptable
restriction, however, cannot decide it.

-- 
Nobu Nakada