From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 22 15:10:03 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87F18106566C for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:10:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58BDB8FC0C for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:10:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p2MFA3gU063879 for ; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:10:03 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p2MFA3WQ063878; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:10:03 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:10:03 GMT Message-Id: <201103221510.p2MFA3WQ063878@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Oliver Fromme Cc: Subject: Re: bin/155034: [PATCH] dd(1) dies on SIGUSR1; should print info X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Oliver Fromme List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:10:03 -0000 The following reply was made to PR bin/155034; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Oliver Fromme To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Re: bin/155034: [PATCH] dd(1) dies on SIGUSR1; should print info Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:01:51 +0100 (CET) Chris Rees wrote: > Maxim Konovalov wrote: > > FreeBSD uses SIGINFO for such purposes for ages in many programs > > apart from dd(1).  IMHO, nothing to fix here. > > Of course, and I'm not suggesting that FreeBSD is wrong in any way. > > My point was that it was rather a harsh punishment for using a GNU-ism > where dd died after 30 minutes of chugging or so. Well, when it died, it did exactly what you told it to: Terminating the process is the default action for SIGUSR1, see signal(3), and the dd(1) manpage doesn't mention that SIGUSR1 is used for anything (in rather states that SIGINFO is used for the purpose that you intended), so the default action applies. I tend to agree with Maxim here. > Would it hurt for dd to ignore the signal rather than die? I imagine a > lot less than otherwise. But then -- for consistency -- you would have to apply the same patch to *all* programs that use SIGINFO, such as dump and tar. And what should be done if a program uses SIGINFO for status display *and* SIGUSR1 for something completely unrelated, such as ftp(1)? Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd "That's what I love about GUIs: They make simple tasks easier, and complex tasks impossible." -- John William Chambless