Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 12:45:37 +0100 From: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@scc.nl> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: new sigset_t and upgrading: a proposal Message-ID: <19990930124537.A39723@walton.maths.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <37F337CC.5E06911B@scc.nl> References: <37F337CC.5E06911B@scc.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 12:13:32PM +0200, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > So, the problem can be split into: > A) New syscalls using the new sigset_t (sigaction and so on) > B) A new sigframe (new siginfo, no sigcontext but ucontext_t) "I'm probably missing something, but..." (TM) The new syscall problem has been delt with before by catching the illegal signal and doing it by hand (getcwd works this way in 3.X anyway). Could the signal calls not do the following: 1) On first call use the osignal stuff to catch the illegal syscall signal, and set a have__newsigt if the signal is presnet and then use the new syscalls. 2) If they're not present settle for translating the calls. Once you know if you have the new sigframe or not you can decide if you have to translate. David. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990930124537.A39723>