From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Jun 16 22:36:48 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mass.dis.org (dhcp45-24.dis.org [216.240.45.24]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFD1E37B406; Sun, 16 Jun 2002 22:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mass.dis.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.dis.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g5EMcQhv000828; Fri, 14 Jun 2002 15:38:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from msmith@mass.dis.org) Message-Id: <200206142238.g5EMcQhv000828@mass.dis.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Terry Lambert Cc: Giorgos Keramidas , Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira , Garance A Drosihn , FreeBSD-arch@FreeBSD.org, msmith@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Adding SO_NOSIGPIPE to -STABLE/-CURRENT In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 14 Jun 2002 15:10:38 PDT." <3D0A69DE.F2214A69@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 15:38:26 -0700 From: Michael Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > This SO_SIGPIPE discussion seems bent on trying to make the signal > facility more able than it is, when in fact signals were (and are) > a bad idea in the first place. Actually, this has nothing to do with it. The issue revolves around the seperation of resource ownership between a program and the frameworks that it links with. In many cases, the program has no idea that the framework has a pipe/socket open, and is thus surprised by the signal. In other cases, it will install its own handler and be confused. > Why are you getting SIGPIPE in the first place, rather than > some other indicator? Isn't it because you are using the wrong > system call to send data down a socket? No, it's because the socket's closed and the signal mask is process-wide. > If you are going to provide this facility, at *least* make it > general, and not socket specific. Make it an fcntl, not a > setsockopt. There aren't any file option bits left. And when was the last time you got SIGPIPE from a file being closed? Sorry Terry, this one's already been solved. The single issue here is whether FreeBSD actually wants to take something back from Darwin, or whether you're all just too stubborn and stuck up yourselves to take what is, in reality, a trivial and entirely worthwhile change. So much for "are Apple going to give anything back"? Try "is FreeBSD too arrogant to accept anything from Apple"? = Mike -- To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. - Theodore Roosevelt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message