On Wed, 30 Jun 2021 17:24:28 -0600, "Theo de Raadt" wrote:
> Scott Cheloha <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > FWIW, the manpage has literally always led with this bolded
> > implementation detail. From January of 1986:
> >
> > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/csrg/lib/libc/gen/ualarm.3?revision=25789&view=m
> arkup
>
> I'm just saying it is uninformative and distracting.
I think we should actively discourage the use of ularm(3) and tell
people to use setitimer(2) instead. It was removed from POSIX which
makes it a liability in terms of portability. E.g.
This interface is obsoleted by setitimer(2).
It looks like systat is the only consumer of ualarm(3) in the tree.
I don't think it even makes sense there since the actual delay is
in seconds, not microseconds. The change to ualarm/usleep was made
by canacar@ in 2008. I don't see any reason why it cannot use
alarm/sleep like it used to but I've only taken a quick look.
- todd
