On Fri, 19. May 2006, 11:01:49 -0700, Paul Eggert wrote: > There's one other thing about this particular problem that may save us > here, though. The current code tests that nanosleep works at runtime, > not merely whether it links. I suspect this is overkill, at least > nowadays. And, since the original poster is talking about a > cross-compilation environment, where all runtime tests fail, maybe > changing the test to check only that nanosleep links will solve his > problem, as the replacement code won't be compiled at all.
No, unfortunately it does not, because the target system does not have a nanosleep function. Martin
