Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 08:45:24 +0300 From: Vasil Dimov <vd@FreeBSD.org> To: Alin-Adrian Anton <aanton@spintech.ro> Cc: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: which running thread gests the external signal Message-ID: <20060504054524.GA5017@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> In-Reply-To: <44590A59.7000307@spintech.ro> References: <4456A5B3.2010809@spintech.ro> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0605012044390.25456@sea.ntplx.net> <44579DE0.1050207@spintech.ro> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0605021400420.414@sea.ntplx.net> <44589A77.7070707@spintech.ro> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0605030848260.6093@sea.ntplx.net> <44590A59.7000307@spintech.ro>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --]
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:54:01PM +0300, Alin-Adrian Anton wrote:
> Daniel Eischen wrote:
> [..]
> >
> >Note that sigprocmask() and pthread_sigprocmask() are equivalent. I
> >don't even think pthread_sigprocmask() is in the standard any longer
> >(it used to be in an older version of the standard). New applications
> >should be using sigprocmask().
> >
>
> Yes I noticed. However, this just happens to be the implementation
> (probably pthread_sigmask is a wrapper to sigprocmask).
>
> This might not be the case on other OS, so for portability I'll stick to
> the pthread_sigmask in threads, and sigprocmask in single threaded apps.
>
For portability you should stick to the standards.
Good luck!
--
Vasil Dimov
gro.DSBeerF@dv
Testing can show the presence of bugs, but not their absence.
-- Edsger W. Dijkstra
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFEWZT0Fw6SP/bBpCARAgzMAKCb1fHbPdNmPO/asXRzFhUrit1BgwCfeo1H
4qOUbZEBhxdib/X1u9CwK68=
=LFZp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060504054524.GA5017>