From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 17:33:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 17:33:26 -0500 Received: from pc2-cwma1-4-cust86.swan.cable.ntl.com ([213.105.254.86]:28544 "EHLO irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 17:33:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Question about Linux signal handling From: Alan Cox To: Albert Cahalan Cc: developer_linux@yahoo.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <1046039341.32116.34.camel@cube> References: <1046039341.32116.34.camel@cube> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Message-Id: <1046043810.2092.0.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.1 (1.2.1-4) Date: 23 Feb 2003 23:43:31 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2003-02-23 at 22:29, Albert Cahalan wrote: > Yes. This is the behavior of all SysV UNIX systems > and Linux kernels. Unfortunately, BSD got it wrong. Firstly BSD didn't get it wrong, things merely diverged historically after V7 unix. > Worse, the glibc developers saw fit to ignore both > UNIX history and Linus. They implemented BSD behavior > by making signal() use the sigaction system call Also wrong. If you read the gcc documentation you can select favouring BSD or SYS5 behaviour at compile time glibc has the best of both worlds