From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jan 21 19:21:29 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id TAA01957 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 21 Jan 1996 19:21:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from becker1.u.washington.edu (spaz@becker1.u.washington.edu [140.142.12.67]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA01952 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 1996 19:21:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by becker1.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW96.01/UW-NDC Revision: 2.33 ) id AA11183; Sun, 21 Jan 96 19:21:19 -0800 X-Sender: spaz@becker1.u.washington.edu Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 19:21:19 -0800 (PST) From: John Utz To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: incorrect proto of sa_handler in 2.05R, 2.1R ? Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk Hello; I am trying to get a snapshot of octave to build on a 2.0.5 machine and i have run into a problem. I am curious as to wether or not this has been changed in 2.1 RELEASE. I am also curious as to weather or not the author of octave is incorrect in asserting that the following prototype is in error. Please respond at your earliest convienience so i can inform him if he needs to ifdef this in for current and future freebsd releases This is the definition of sa_handler in /usr/include/sys/signal.h: mira: {4} grep sa_handler /usr/include/sys/*.h /usr/include/sys/signal.h: void (*sa_handler)(); I have just been told that this is not a correct prototype for this, and that it should be : void (*sa_handler)(int); Does anyone take issue with this? Does anyone agree with this? will it be changed? has it been changed? tnx; ******************************************************************************* John Utz spaz@u.washington.edu idiocy is the impulse function in the convolution of life