Mon Nov 13 08:57:00 GMT 2000
On Mon, Nov 13, 2000 at 12:16:14AM -0600, Chris Abbey wrote:
>the timewarp here is because this has been a "back burner" issue for me,
>and I've finally gotten back to it.
>At 10:40 10/2/00 -0400, Chris Faylor wrote:
>>On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 10:41:28PM -0500, Chris Abbey wrote:
>> >Does anyone out there really understand signal handling in cygwin?
>>SIGQUIT != CTRL-BREAK.
>ok, very good point. I've gone back and looked at the code,
>for Windows it registers SIGBREAK instead of SIGQUIT as it
>does on every other platform, grrr.
There is no SIGBREAK in /usr/include/sys/signal.h.
>>Same as UNIX: sigprocmask, etc.
>suggestion for further reading?
No idea. "man sigprocmask" on linux would probably be enlightening.
(Just to stop the inevitable suggestion from somebody:
"I think it would be a great idea if you included the man pages for all
of the functions that cygwin exports when you release cygwin. Hope this
>>Cygwin equates CTRL-BREAK with CTRL-C. Both send a SIGINT to the process.
>but that doesn't jive with the behaviour I'm seeing. If I start the program
>and hit ctrl-Break it *starts* to execute the signal handler then get's killed.
>if I start the program and send it SIGINT via 'kill -SIGINT <pid>' then it
>just get's killed, the signal handler does not appear to be called at all.
Dunno. Probably, you're sending more than one CTRL-BREAK. It works fine for me.
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More information about the Cygwin