Re: BROKEN_NON_BLOCKING_CONNECT

[Paul Eggert]

On 03/27/2015 02:59 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Are there any other platforms that might
> need it and the related SELECT_CAN_DO_WRITE_MASK and
> NON_BLOCKING_CONNECT?  Or can these be deleted now?
No platforms should need BROKEN_NON_BLOCKING_CONNECT or 
SELECT_CAN_DO_WRITE_MASK, so I removed them by applying the attached 
patch.  Platforms that predate POSIX.1-2001 might need 
NON_BLOCKING_CONNECT, though, since that feature wasn't standardized by 
POSIX until POSIX.1-2001, so I left that part alone for now.

This raises the topic of how far back in history Emacs should go, when 
trying to support older platforms.  Currently Emacs is quite 
conservative and relies only on POSIX.1-1988 or later.  I don't know of 
any currently-supported GNUish or Unixish platform that doesn't largely 
conform to POSIX.1-2001 or later, so as far as I know the Emacs code 
that runs only on hosts predating POSIX-2001 isn't being tested and 
quite possibly no longer works.  So it would make sense for Emacs to 
start assuming POSIX.1-2001 or later, if there's consensus for doing that.

0001-Assume-BROKEN_NON_BLOCKING_CONNECT.patch
Description: Text Data