Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!oberon!cit-vax!amdahl!acs
From: acs@amdahl.amdahl.com (Tony Sumrall)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Endless WaitIO() in VT100
Message-ID: <16584@amdahl.amdahl.com>
Date: Mon, 19-Oct-87 23:39:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: amdahl.16584
Posted: Mon Oct 19 23:39:44 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 21-Oct-87 06:11:22 EDT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 17


Ed Puckett has zeroed in on an AbortIO()/WaitIO() bug that is present in
VT100 R2.7 but was present back in R2.6 days.  The problem appears to be
that sometimes, after an AbortIO(), the subsequent WaitIO() is never
satisfied.  Way back when this problem was originally discussed, Neil
Katin of Commodore said that the AbortIO() should be followed by a
Wait()/GetMsg() pair or, alternatively, a WaitIO() since the abort doesn't
remove the reply.  Ed changed the WaitIO() with a GetMsg() call with no
intervening Wait() and, he reports, the problem disappears!

Anyone got the straight scoop?  Doesn't seem that, in a message passing
system, one should simply do a GetMsg() without a preceeding Wait().
-- 
Tony Sumrall acs@amdahl.com <=> amdahl!acs

[ Opinions expressed herein are the author's and should not be construed
  to reflect the views of Amdahl Corp. ]