Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!rochester!udel!new
From: new@udel.EDU (Darren New)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Problem with CreateProc & LoadSeg
Message-ID: <18771@estelle.udel.EDU>
Date: 7 May 90 19:35:55 GMT
References: <897@tau.sm.luth.se> <3504@moondance.cs.uq.oz.au>
Reply-To: new@ee.udel.edu (Darren New)
Organization: University of Delaware
Lines: 11

In article <3504@moondance.cs.uq.oz.au> thyssen@focl5.cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Thyssen) writes:
>    Arrrrggghhhh.....  Would ALL programers out there please include
>the BREAK_C signal flags in their code for testing for the close gadget
>It not only allow the user the send a break for easier testing but is a good
>thing to do..  To many programs Especially those for CLI don't do this
>Programers who leave it out should be shot.

AND ALSO Leave The BREAK_D Signal Alone!   Even Lattice mucks this up.
BREAK_D is for stopping a shell script without disturbing the currently
running program, so only shells should be testing this bit!   This was
documented back in the 1.1 RKMs.   -- Darren