Index: [thread] [date] [subject] [author]
  From: Marcus Sundberg <e94_msu@e.kth.se>
  To  : ggi-develop@eskimo.com
  Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 11:21:07 +0200

Re: signal vs sigset

Matthew Crosby wrote:
> 
> Is there any reason not to use safe signals, ie sigaction vs signal?
> Are there really any systems out there that don't have sigaction?
> 
> Right now, I'm having problems with ggi and the X target on both
> solaris and glibc, with programs quitting every now and again with
> profile alarms from the itimer used in disply/common/mansync.inc.
> Changing the signal function calls to sigset fixes this, since the
> signal handler is never removed.  However I believe some BSDs don't
> have sigset?  Looking at Stevens, it seems sigaction (which sigset is
> just a wrapper function for) is in Posix.1, and therefore should be
> supported everywhere.

What version of libggi are you using?
The current devel-CVS contains many improvements to the mansync
code and should work properly.

Btw, the itimer has afaik never been used in mansync.inc,
MANSYNC_CHILD is the default for all targets.

//Marcus
-- 
-------------------------------+------------------------------------
        Marcus Sundberg        | http://www.stacken.kth.se/~mackan/
 Royal Institute of Technology |       Phone: +46 707 295404
       Stockholm, Sweden       |      E-Mail: e94_msu@e.kth.se

Index: [thread] [date] [subject] [author]