This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
> Roland McGrath <roland@frob.com> writes: > > > The only observable difference between having it or not is in what > > value (sigaction(sig, 0, &oact), oact.sa_mask) has. > > Right. So adding the sigaddset() seems correct. Eh? Well, it is superfluous and so I don't see why you say it "seems correct" (as opposed to its lack). If you want signal to be anally compatible with BSD, then one will have to check whether the sa_mask value reported by sigaction after a signal call contains the signal in question or not. I have to stretch to contemplate ways a program could manage to care one way or the other.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |