Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 19:30:58 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] semaphore usage "port based"? Message-ID: <20060404093058.GF683@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20060403144916.J947@ganymede.hub.org> References: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0604030817090.21105-100000@sea.ntplx.net> <20060403140902.C947@ganymede.hub.org> <20060403182504.S76562@fledge.watson.org> <20060403144916.J947@ganymede.hub.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 2006-Apr-03 14:55:10 -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: >That is all I'm advocatin / asking for ... some way of reverting kill(PID, >0) back to the old, FreeBSD 4.x behaviour, where this works beautifully :( >At least until someone does get around to 'virtualization of SysV IPC' :( There's the old standby: You have the source code. You should be able to get things to work by expanding prison_check() into cr_cansignal() and changing the error return from ESRCH to EPERM. Having not tried this, I can't comment on possible adverse side-effects. -- Peter Jeremy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060404093058.GF683>