Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 01:29:48 +1100 From: Tim Robbins <tjr@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Mike Makonnen <mtm@identd.net> Cc: julian@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: signals still broken ? Message-ID: <20030227012948.A53895@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au> In-Reply-To: <20030227011003.A53053@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au>; from tjr@FreeBSD.ORG on Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 01:10:03AM %2B1100 References: <20030226112543.ISTQ16831.out001.verizon.net@kokeb.ambesa.net> <20030227011003.A53053@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 01:10:03AM +1100, Tim Robbins wrote: > On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 06:25:39AM -0500, Mike Makonnen wrote: > > > The following program is stuck in pause(3) forever. I have reproduced the bug in > > 5.0-RELEASE, but 4.7-STABLE behaves as expected: the child resumes upon > > receiving SIGCONT. > > I spent a while trying to decipher the 5.x signal code and I think I have > spotted the code responsible for the difference in behaviour between > 5.x and 4.7. The difference is that 5.x drops SIGCONT when the process > is already "active" even when a handler is installed for that signal. > > Here is a patch to try: [...] Never mind, I guess David beat me to it (kern_sig.c 1.211). Tim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030227012948.A53895>