Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 03:34:14 +0400 From: Alex Semenyaka <alexs@ratmir.ru> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libpthread patch Message-ID: <20030418233414.GF3693@snark.ratmir.ru> In-Reply-To: <20030418230818.GE3693@snark.ratmir.ru> References: <20030418224522.GA63339@snark.ratmir.ru> <Pine.GSO.4.10.10304181851120.5006-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> <20030418230818.GE3693@snark.ratmir.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 03:08:19AM +0400, Alex Semenyaka wrote: > But are there programs which call signal(SIGCHLD, SIG_IGN) and then trying > to wait()? I supposed that there are no such: suggested behaviour of signal() By the way... I just thought that it might be reasonable to allow user to choose that behaviour on the fly (like he can do it for the malloc(3)). Do anyone have the objections against this way? If there are no ones, I can do the patch that allows to signal() OPTIONALLY set SA_NOCLDWAIT flag if the environment variable (say, NOCHLD_NOWAIT) is set. Thanks again :) SY, Alex
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030418233414.GF3693>