why SIGINT top stop the process, why was not SIGSTOP used ?

paawan oza paawan1982@yahoo.com
Tue Feb 10 16:35:00 GMT 2009


I have been changing gdb.
as gdb uses ctrl+c (send SIGINT) to stop the process......
I am also doing the same.

but I have observed with gdb-6.7
that if process has blocked SIGINT, then actually gdb will not get SIGINT back.

I think this mechanism has been there for a long time.

my doubt is : why is this design of SIGINT?

why can not we use SIGSTOP ? because process cant block SIGSTOP.
though default gdb is configured to pass signal SIGSTOP (we can set it to 0)

but instead of SIGINT, cant we use SIGSTOP to stop the process ?



More information about the Gdb mailing list