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]