[lkml]   [1996]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: On SIGCHLD signal semantics
Marc wrote:

>First, applications that set their SIGCHLD handler to SIG_IGN are not
>inherently broken. They are simply expecting System V semantics.

But Linux is not System V. Linux is Linux. Ergo: these
applications are broken. Full stop.

>One open question remains, and that is the advisability of causing child
>processes to inherit SIG_IGN as their SIGCHLD signal handler (i.e. to do
>an exec* syscall while ignoring child processes).

Perhaps the SIGCHLD handler can be reset to SIG_DFL across an
exec, unless of course POSIX exlicitly forbids this.
Michiel Boland <>
University of Nijmegen
The Netherlands

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.074 / U:0.648 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site