From owner-freebsd-current  Tue Aug 12 16:32:50 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA00936
          for current-outgoing; Tue, 12 Aug 1997 16:32:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA00929
          for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 12 Aug 1997 16:32:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id QAA09419; Tue, 12 Aug 1997 16:26:53 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199708122326.QAA09419@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: siginterrupt (was Re: Error in sleep !)
To: ache@nagual.pp.ru
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 16:26:53 -0700 (MST)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, sos@sos.freebsd.dk, current@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970813025103.1477A-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net> from "=?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?=" at Aug 13, 97 03:07:28 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > POSIX says that system calls will not be restarted by default (the
> > historical System V behaviour for signals).
> 
> Could you please send exact quote just about this particular thing?
> Many times POSIX is very unclear or can be misinterpreted.

Sorry, I don't have the standard handy.

General Rule of thumb: POSIX favors System V behaviour.


> > If FreeBSD has been updated to exhibit POSIX behaviour (the original
> > poster was claiming it had been), then the signal and siginterrupt
> > man pages, which claim historical BSD behaviour, are wrong.  They
> > should claim POSIX behaviour instead.
> 
> Currently siginterrupt and signal man pages says nothing about POSIX
> conformance, so manpages are right independently of how we interpretate
> POSIX.

They say what the FreeBSD defaults are, and they are (probably) wrong.


> POSIX says exactly that _any_ non-blocked and non-ignored signal should
> terminate sleep(3)/sleep(1) including default no-op signals like ^T, etc. 

I think there is a difference between "masked" and "sa_handler == SIG_DFL"
here.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.