From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Dec 27 14:36:08 1996
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id OAA11599
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 27 Dec 1996 14:36:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id OAA11586
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 27 Dec 1996 14:36:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.3/8.6.9) id JAA30911; Sat, 28 Dec 1996 09:32:02 +1100
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 09:32:02 +1100
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199612272232.JAA30911@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, ttsai@pobox.com
Subject: Re: catching SIGILL
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>  It appears that it's not possible to catch SIGILL on 2.1.6.  Is that
>correct?  I peeked at the source and the action is set to SIG_DFL each
>time.

SIGILL can be caught just like SIGQUIT.  However, if a process trashes
its stack pointer so badly that a signal cannot be delivered, then
FreeBSD uncatches SIGILL and kills the process with a SIGILL.

Crashme apparently trashes its stack pointer very quickly.

Bruce