From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,8ee4430d1820a774 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: gpriv@axonx.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT.Sockets: Timeval_Duration is in milliseconds? Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 06:32:15 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <93c78688-a3e1-41ee-8ee2-343968aae298@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com> References: <9d687056-c98b-405a-b166-afddac34f109@e67g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> <99906a58-2645-4880-bd13-9b63a30ffb59@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> <8808f9fb-64a5-4a44-9684-dc0446a26bbc@b1g2000pra.googlegroups.com> <8934100e-0576-4078-8e15-cc4aa942af3f@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <9de762a3-bac6-4295-b321-3e8091baf28d@d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.196.71.114 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1197556335 20774 127.0.0.1 (13 Dec 2007 14:32:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:32:15 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com; posting-host=151.196.71.114; posting-account=YaY8rAoAAAAAnFXOECY3BGVJsrvFJCgy User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-Via: 1.1 SPARKS X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20071127 Firefox/2.0.0.11,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18922 Date: 2007-12-13T06:32:15-08:00 List-Id: On Dec 13, 8:13 am, Simon Wright wrote: > gp...@axonx.com writes: > > On Dec 11, 3:33 pm, Simon Wright wrote: > >> gp...@axonx.com writes: > >> > Yep, it worked: > > >> > ..done with EXPIRED after 4.999302724 > > >> So GNAT GPL 2007 handles _this_ call right -- which functionality was > >> it you had the problem with? Do you have a test case? > > > Linux update: > > > Timeout value is in seconds here. So it is only a Windows problem as > > to be expected. > > Looking athttp://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms740141.aspxit > turns out that the Windows version of select(2) uses a struct timeval* > -- so not surprising that it behaves as we were expecting. Huh. > > --S Microsoft could fix that problem by checking the size of the parameter passed to setsockopt without breaking all the software already written for winsock. George.