This is the mail archive of the firstname.lastname@example.org
mailing list for the Cygwin project. See the Cygwin
home page for more information.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Re: B20.1 under NT4.0, non blocking I/O
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: B20.1 under NT4.0, non blocking I/O
- From: "J. J. Farrell" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 14:09:09 -0800 (PST)
- Cc: email@example.com
- Delivered-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-To: mailing list email@example.com
- In-Reply-To: <C1256730.002B5549.firstname.lastname@example.org> from "email@example.com" at Mar 10, 99 08:53:13 am
- Mailing-List: contact firstname.lastname@example.org; run by ezmlm
- Sender: email@example.com
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> In the UNIX world the statement
> "fcntl(fd,F_SETFL,FNDELAY|fcntl(fd,F_GETFL,0));" may be used to set "non
> blocking io" flag on a given file descriptor.
This is true of some parts of the UNIX world, but it's not the
Standard way to do it. The preferred name for the FNDELAY flag
in user-level code is O_NDELAY, but the Standard way to achieve
this effect is to use O_NONBLOCK. There are usually small
differences between the meaning of O_NDELAY and O_NONBLOCK in
implementations which support both, but O_NONBLOCK is the only
one you can reasonably expect to be supported on all UNIX-like
> In cygwin B20.1 under NT4.0
> it is completely inoperative.
Having said that, I've no idea if O_NONBLOCK works any better
than O_NDELAY under cygwin!
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to email@example.com