> > I interpret that as saying that allowing subseconds in sleep is useless > > bloat because a shell script can't achieve that level of accuracy > > anyway. I tend to agree, but I'm not going to make the debian sleep fork > > from upstream if you're convinced it's a good idea. > > But isn't it only sub-*microsecond* (or even sub-millisecond) accuracy > that is useless?
For sleep(1) it is useless because IMHO no shell script writer probably expects subsecond argument option, unless the GNU (non-std) sleep(1) is being used. > Being able to specify a sub-*second* interval is most > definitely useful if you need a delay that is less than a second, but > not tied to processor speed. I agree that it might be useful but I would think that this should be provided by a different binary for whoever think it is useful. E.g., see the sleepenh package. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
