On Wed 15 Nov 2017 at 07:43:53 (-0600), Karlin High wrote: > On 11/15/2017 2:36 AM, Christian Alpen wrote: > >The only thing: In both cases it takes a rather long time to > >generate the files. > > In my case, I found that the script calls for usleep, but debian and > ubuntu have sleepenh instead. And it seems that usleep 250 is > equivalent to sleepenh 0.250; at first this left me wondering what > the computer could possibly be doing, sitting there waiting with no > system resources maxed.
I don't understand this. sleepenh is *not* a replacement for usleep. Gnu systems use *their* sleep command which takes non-integer values. As expected, sleep uses seconds, usleep uses microseconds (where u is the usual replacement for ยต) and nanosleep uses nanoseconds (but the last isn't a command, obviously). Perhaps someone didn't realise that. sleepenh is designed for interval timers and is really more of a wait. It allows an amount of "work" to be done between calls, and the sleep time is computed each time in such a way as to wait for the expiry of the desired interval, without the accumulation of rounding errors. And should you overrun with the amount of "work" done, it will effectively try to catch up. Cheers, David. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
