From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 27 17:00:35 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-threads@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B46216A403 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:00:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1870B43D4C for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:00:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k3RH0Yem063768 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:00:34 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k3RH0Yp2063767; Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:00:34 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:00:34 GMT Message-Id: <200604271700.k3RH0Yp2063767@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.org From: eugeny gladkih Cc: Subject: Re: threads/94176: KSE: sigwait doesn't recieve SIGWINCH sent by pthread_kill() or kill -WINCH X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: eugeny gladkih List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 17:00:35 -0000 The following reply was made to PR threads/94176; it has been noted by GNATS. From: eugeny gladkih To: Andriy Gapon Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, David Xu Subject: Re: threads/94176: KSE: sigwait doesn't recieve SIGWINCH sent by pthread_kill() or kill -WINCH Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 20:50:59 +0400 >>>>> "AG" == Andriy Gapon writes: AG> David, John, AG> maybe it would be beneficial to the general programmer public to add AG> something similar to the NOTES section of the following man page to our AG> man page for sigwait: AG> http://condor.wesleyan.edu/cgi-bin/man.cgi?section=2&topic=sigwait AG> Using the original example, it would mean adding something like the AG> following code to get the desired behavior: AG> void dummy_handler(int signum) AG> { AG> return; AG> } AG> void *thread(void* unused) { AG> struct sigaction sa; AG> sa.sa_handler = dummy_handler; AG> sigemptyset(&sa.sa_mask); AG> sa.sa_flags = 0; AG> sigaction(SIGWINCH, &sa, NULL); AG> . AG> . AG> . why so stupid code should be presented in all software wanted just to wait the signal? :( sigwait'ed signal is not ignored one! we DON'T ignore it we DO wait for it. I'm afraid there is another problem with SIGTERM which will terminate process. am I right, yeah? -- Yours sincerely, Eugeny. Doctor Web, Ltd. http://www.drweb.com