Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!texbell!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: Locks and resources (was path-list stuff) Message-ID: <5093@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 3 Feb 90 03:29:03 GMT References: <130652@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <13129@cbnewsc.ATT.COM> <5074@sugar.hackercorp.com> <1515@sas.UUCP> Reply-To: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston Lines: 18 [ I wanted async I/O to file handles ] In article <1515@sas.UUCP> walker@sas.UUCP (Doug Walker) writes: > So what's the matter with the packet-level I/O? It's documented, it's MsgPort > based, you can have multiple outstanding packets. It's up to you whether to > WaitPort() or just go on about your business. Yes, but according to (I think) Matt Dillon it doesn't work right. I don't know if that means it's hard to get right or if there's a bug in AmigaDOS triggered by a task having multiple outstanding requests, but I trust the source enough to not want to try it myself. Browser does its own packet I/O to implement a four-argument Rename(), but doesn't do multiple requests at a time. -- Peter "Have you hugged your wolf today" da Silva `-_-' 'U` "I haven't lost my mind, it's backed up on tape somewhere"