From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JPNja-0006jC-CC for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:57:34 -0800 Received: from w12a.httpserveur.net ([67.15.80.77] helo=websiteout12.httpserveur.net) by mail.sourceforge.net with smtp (Exim 4.44) id 1JPNjY-0003c5-1g for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:57:34 -0800 Message-ID: <47B34BA0.30006@club-internet.fr> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:57:20 +0100 From: clowncoder MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [uml-devel] g_timeout_add List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Hello, It seems that g_timeout_add glib timeouts are not accurate when there is no gtk activity on an uml target. This may be a glib problem since I cannot check that it does not occur on my host. When gtk events occur through mouse moves, then the timeout is good (a 5 sec timeout) if no graphical activity exists, the timeout takes an average of 12 sec, even if there is console activity on the uml machine. Sorry that my host has no gtk to double-check on a physical machine. Vincent Perrier ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel