From owner-freebsd-current Mon Sep 6 8:45:12 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu [18.24.4.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1072214D8B for ; Mon, 6 Sep 1999 08:45:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu) Received: (from wollman@localhost) by khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id LAA03251; Mon, 6 Sep 1999 11:44:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from wollman) Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 11:44:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Garrett Wollman Message-Id: <199909061544.LAA03251@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: Marcel Moolenaar Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: (P)review: sigset_t for more than 32 signals In-Reply-To: <37D3C7A5.1B8A4935@scc.nl> References: <199909061300.JAA07157@hda.hda.com> <37D3C7A5.1B8A4935@scc.nl> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG < said: > You first need to get rid of any code that assumes that siget_t is an > (unsigned) integer. Use macros to abstract the access to the new sigset_t > so that you don't replace one assumption with the other... Anything that knows about sigset_t will already be using the POSIX macros for it, since sigset_t was a POSIX invention. The old `sigmask'-style functions don't have such an API, so they need to be left as-is. (Such programs would not know about high-numbered signals anyway, so this is no great loss.) Peter D. and I have been discussing this topic over the past few days, and I was about to sit down and do the implementation when I saw your message. I'd appreciate it if you can hold off on yours for a bit. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same wollman@lcs.mit.edu | O Siem / The fires of freedom Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message