[Emacs-bug-tracker] bug#7359: closed (sleep 9999999999)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:30:49 +0000
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: bug#7359: sleep 9999999999
has caused the GNU bug report #7359,
regarding sleep 9999999999
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden)


-- 
7359: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=7359
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> sleep 9999999999
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Tue, 9 Nov 2010 14:31:42 -0500
>
>
>
>
> sleep called with very big numbers returns immediately with success
>
> -Matt
>
> address@hidden,d1r17733u07 | date; sleep 9999999999 && echo success; date; 
> sleep --version
> Tue Nov  9 14:31:04 EST 2010
> success
> Tue Nov  9 14:31:04 EST 2010
> sleep (GNU coreutils) 5.97
> Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> This is free software.  You may redistribute copies of it under the terms of
> the GNU General Public License <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>.
> There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
>
> Written by Jim Meyering and Paul Eggert.
> address@hidden,d1r17733u07 | 
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#7359: sleep 9999999999
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:30:49 +0000
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;	rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3
>
>
>
>
> On 10/11/10 18:20, Matthew Bachmann wrote:
> > Existing stuff:
> > 
> > address@hidden,d1r17733u07 | strace -e nanosleep sleep 9999999999
> > nanosleep({9999999999, 0}, NULL)        = 0
> > address@hidden,d1r17733u07 | rpm -qa | grep coreutils
> > policycoreutils-1.33.12-14.2.el5
> > coreutils-5.97-19.el5
> > 
> > With download you pointed me at:
> > 
> > address@hidden,d1r17733u07 | strace -e nanosleep src/sleep 9999999999
> > nanosleep({4233600, 0},  <unfinished ...>
> > address@hidden,d1r17733u07 | 
> > 
> > I ctrl-c'ed it because it appeared to be actually sleeping instead of 
> > returning immediately.  So yeah, it looks like it works fine with newer stuff.
>
> Right, that confirms that it's sleeping for 49 days at a time.
> I.E. the existing immediately detectable workaround is in place.
>
> cheers,
> Pádraig.
>
>
> --- End Message ---