From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#10404: [PATCH] Power: sleep longer than two seconds at a time Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 21:14:12 +0300 Message-ID: <834nd3kxhn.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1371060910 11347 80.91.229.3 (12 Jun 2013 18:15:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 18:15:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 10404@debbugs.gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 12 20:15:10 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UmpZd-0003c5-Sr for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 20:15:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36974 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UmpZd-0003Qg-BF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:15:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44581) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UmpZZ-0003Og-KQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:15:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UmpZX-0003Jq-9V for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:15:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:55006) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UmpZX-0003In-3M for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:15:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UmpZW-0002HS-M9 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:15:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 18:15:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 10404 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 10404-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B10404.13710608558623 (code B ref 10404); Wed, 12 Jun 2013 18:15:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10404) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jun 2013 18:14:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59241 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UmpYl-0002F1-4z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:14:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:40843) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1UmpYh-0002Ea-Sq for 10404@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:14:14 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MOA00600L9IH600@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for 10404@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 21:14:05 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MOA006XYLBGG910@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 21:14:05 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:75020 Archived-At: > From: Glenn Morris > Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:25:57 -0400 > > > This sounds like a good idea. > Does anyone have any comments? We don't use sigblock or sigsetmask, I believe because they are obsolescent. We use sigprocmask instead. The other comment is that these changes ignore the MS-Windows implementation of SIGALRM. Thanks.