Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 20:49:24 -0500 (EST) From: Brian Feldman <green@unixhelp.org> To: "Richard Seaman, Jr." <lists@tar.com> Cc: "current@freebsd.org" <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: RFSIGSHARE ready? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811112041160.725-100000@janus.syracuse.net> In-Reply-To: <199811111951.NAA17744@ns.tar.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote: > I've looked more closely at your patch. If I understand what it does, > it shares signal actions as well as signal masks between threads. Correct. If the flag is used, of course. > > Its my understanding that POSIX specifies that signal actions > are shared process wide, but that each thread has its own signal > mask. It appears to me that this is also what linux threads > attempts to implement. CLONE_SIGHAND, what does that mean to you? To me it means that signal handlers are shared between processes. > > If you want POSIX and linux thread compliant signal handling, > I would think you would share the p_sigacts structure, but > not the p_sigmask structure. However, I have no idea what > the linux kernel actually does, so if your goal is to match > that, I have no idea if your implementation does that. I do intend to for every appearence emulate the behavior of Linux for the Linux processes. > > Also, FYI, your patches break a make buildworld in gdb too. I'll look into this. Cheers, Brian Feldman > > > > 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?Pine.BSF.4.05.9811112041160.725-100000>