[lkml]   [1996]   [Apr]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: signal(SIGFPE,SIG_IGN), possible solution?
Followup to:  <Pine.LNX.3.91.960425074845.22041C-100000@linux.cs.Helsinki.FI>
By author: Linus Torvalds <>
In newsgroup:
> What is so horribly hard in understanding the fact that this is not a
> kernel issue at all. Why do people insist that the added code should go
> into the KERNEL, when the problem is in your broken programs?

No kidding. However, it seems to me that either SIGILL, SIGIOT or
SIGBUS (in decreasing order of personal preference) would be a better
signal than SIGFPE; I think it is reasonable that a program should be
able to expect that receiving a SIGFPE means an FP exception has

By the way, how does one turn on FP exceptions (ideally, specific IEEE
exceptions) under Linux/i386?

PGP public key available - finger
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Bahá'u'lláh
I don't work for Yggdrasil, but they sponsor the linux.* hierarchy.

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.070 / U:0.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site