From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: EWOULDBLOCK and EINPROGRESS in process.c Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 20:15:47 +0200 Message-ID: <83r3sdndt8.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83sicup8s0.fsf@gnu.org> <5511F648.4030505@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1427307384 22766 80.91.229.3 (25 Mar 2015 18:16:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 18:16:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 25 19:16:10 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1YapqW-00029t-Fm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 19:16:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40692 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YapqV-0001NK-Jj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:16:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40723) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YapqS-0001Jv-DZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:16:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YapqO-0001oO-1i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:16:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:42931) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YapqN-0001oB-PL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 14:15:55 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NLS00L005CG5R00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 20:15:54 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NLS00KTC5EITA90@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 20:15:54 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <5511F648.4030505@cs.ucla.edu> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:184249 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 16:42:00 -0700 > From: Paul Eggert > > The EWOULDBLOCK code is there because Kim Storm heard a rumor that some oddball > nonblocking 'connect' implementations returned EWOULDBLOCK. Please see: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2002-02/msg00718.html > > I also vaguely recall stories that some old Unix platforms did that. The most > recent reference I found in a quick Google search was UnixWare 7 Release 7.1.4 > (April 2004): > > http://uw714doc.sco.com/en/SDK_netapi/sockC.nonBlockSocks.html > > If that documentation is right, the current Emacs code wouldn't work on UnixWare > 7.1.4, not that we care. Thanks for the references.