Re: AfterStep and *BSD [ was Re: more wharf problems. ]
Frederick Bruckman (fb@enteract.com)
Tue, 15 Jun 1999 00:40:33 -0500 (CDT)
On Mon, 14 Jun 1999, Phillip J. Rulon wrote:
> Not really a kluge, loop on read 'till you get it all is kind of standard
> for BSDish machines. I went through this 10 years ago when I was working
> on a multi-flavor network-parallel processing package. I was going to
> mention something up-thread but then I came to this post and figured the
> problem was solved.
I think I'd prefer it to loop through the select'd descriptors, retreive
what's available into a buffer, then check to see if that completes a
command. That strikes me as more robust, but it would require allocating
a buffer for each pipe. It could turn out to be slower than reading twice.
What I don't understand now is why it works presently, on any system.
Since both writes and reads don't block, and can't lock, it's pure luck
when a message gets through entire. Do linux users see "Resource
temorarily unavailable", and "Module command is too big" errors in
{.xsession, startx.log}? If not, why not? :)
> BTW, AS/Linux guy for years, new to the list.
Hi. I'm new to the list, and new to AS. I've been using twm/xsm for a
couple years now. I tried those "other" window managers, that tried to
wrest control of my title bars away from me. I love AfterStep!
--
WWW: http://www.afterstep.org/
FTP: ftp://ftp.afterstep.org/
MAIL: http://www.calderasystems.com/linuxcenter/forums/afterstep.html