From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 9 21:20:29 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DF72106564A for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 21:20:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ww0-f50.google.com (mail-ww0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50708FC0A for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 21:20:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwc33 with SMTP id 33so5832637wwc.31 for ; Mon, 09 May 2011 14:20:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OMylmStRka+/Vy6EJsase32xcYH38k/e29LiUMV+mH0=; b=kunb5dJUbr2kLV1SbS0rpjkZhYkycqvzmnHyS8xRxSvVQsQPFI+5XWf1huOrPuOhrt bjmXOXDd4nD5ie6r1BLrfVIEkrfwZyVfmQu/mOwoQvwxLHebnphHV+Fe57YZgwbpJSlR wr6TF4ndmhdDOWVMSsfH1Kw/Y3mypigCd6ks0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=H5p34PnD3fcZavZWlOmzuDibUPcqLZM7UIsSJ+8J3uFm2XcO+1BArNAIM1k98nOrUo fTkxUnVqa44gjckARa7Ccy+Lg/shi4euXK8KmruxqnIwRMIwgX1uyHFk+blRzj8O2V71 ndfVVOB+P6vWOVsAU352SHLy2f19odAlYbkig= Received: by 10.216.236.157 with SMTP id w29mr92849weq.18.1304968396080; Mon, 09 May 2011 12:13:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.48.207 with HTTP; Mon, 9 May 2011 12:12:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110325033736.GA64512@zim.MIT.EDU> References: <201103221457.p2MEvJub035858@lurza.secnetix.de> <20110322181604.GA47588@zim.MIT.EDU> <20110325033736.GA64512@zim.MIT.EDU> From: Chris Rees Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 20:12:46 +0100 Message-ID: To: Eitan Adler , utisoft@gmail.com, Maxim Konovalov , Oliver Fromme , FreeBSD Standards Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Subject: Re: dd dies on SIGUSR1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: utisoft@gmail.com List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 21:20:29 -0000 On 25 March 2011 03:37, David Schultz wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011, Eitan Adler wrote: >> > We are talking about a design decision taken decades ago, which quite >> > possibly was a mistake. >> >> Historical reasons are not be discounted, but in this case because the >> behavior is already non-portable, and already not be relied upon, so >> there is no reason that changing the default is harmful. >> >> > Again, how many people rely on USR1 to terminate a process? >> >> Hopefully none. Even if there are people who do rely on such behavior >> that reliance could be said to be a mistake or otherwise broken. > > Please see my previous message. =A0The historical behavior of SIGUSR1 > terminating a process by default is standard, even on Linux. > > I believe one of the original uses of the signal was to allow > daemons and their children to signal each other. =A0In this use > case, if the notification can't be delivered because the recipient > is unprepared to accept it, termination is appropriate for a > fail-fast design. Since the consensus seems to be for leaving as-is, perhaps someone could please close bin/155034? You can state that I've abandoned it! Chris