On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:06:28 -0400 clipka wrote:

> 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729)
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.29.75.35
> X-Trace: news.povray.org 1247775001 203.29.75.35 (16 Jul 2009 16:10:01
> -0400) Lines: 33
> X-No-Archive: Yes
> X-Copyright: This copyrighted article comes from a private news server
> and may NOT be distributed on USENET or other news servers.
> X-POV-Header: --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Path:
> news.povray.org!81.173.238.87
> Xref: news.povray.org povray.beta-test:10235
> 
> marabou <not### [at] availableyet> wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:11:54 +0200 Le_Forgeron wrote:
>>
>> > Le 15/07/2009 19:40, clipka nous fit lire :
>> >> Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
>> >>> Now, CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID is posix, so should we just hate
>> >>> freebsd 7.2 and lower for not having it ? (no assertion about 8.0)
>> >>
>> >> Sounds like a reasonable option :P (SCNR)
>> >>
>> >> I'd say it depends on how complicated it would be to fix. At any
>> >> rate, it's worth entering into the bugtracker as a compatibility
>> >> issue. As you seem to be into details to some degree, would you
>> >> mind...? kthxbye ;)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> > Entry add in bugtracker, as per request.
>>
>> I thank you for it ;)
> 
> Looks like Le_Forgeron not only entered the issue, but already did a
> thorough analysis; I can only agree with all his conclusions: It should
> be a matter of ../configure identifying that CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID
> isn't available, and in that case not setting HAVE_CLOCK_GETTIME, but
> HAVE_GETRUSAGE instead; as the code seems to be well prepared for
> dealing with clock_gettime() being unavailable, issues worse than
> possibly misleading statistics are not to be expected.
> 
> So no need to loathe freebsd for this :)

sorry, did you read all new posts in this thread?

Post a reply to this message