Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 16:08:38 +0000 From: Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> To: Maxim Konovalov <maxim.konovalov@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dd dies on SIGUSR1 Message-ID: <AANLkTikoZNpmM83%2BU-0AWhO43K67gKNq1dZ4UnL2UAPo@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1103211741220.58326@mp2.macomnet.net> References: <AANLkTi=mWZ7j=pN-tDo_7E7SmFtHnCDEy3pMSBhBoiBL@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1103211741220.58326@mp2.macomnet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21 March 2011 14:43, Maxim Konovalov <maxim.konovalov@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, 21 Mar 2011, 12:03-0000, Chris Rees wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Does anyone have any thoughts on [1]? >> >> >> It's a common usage in GNU systems to send SIGUSR1 to dd, which >> causes it to print info. However... when I tried it it died (ouch). >> >> Two patches are in the PR, one to print summary (imitate GNU) and >> after talking to gavin@ on #bsdcode I made one to ignore the signal. >> >> Which one of these fixes will be most popular? >> > FreeBSD uses SIGINFO for such purposes for ages in many programs > apart from dd(1). =A0IMHO, nothing to fix here. Of course, and I'm not suggesting that FreeBSD is wrong in any way. My point was that it was rather a harsh punishment for using a GNU-ism where dd died after 30 minutes of chugging or so. Would it hurt for dd to ignore the signal rather than die? I imagine a lot less than otherwise. Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTikoZNpmM83%2BU-0AWhO43K67gKNq1dZ4UnL2UAPo>