Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!texbell!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Spawn is impossible to define (was Re: vfork) Message-ID: Date: 24 Jul 90 12:30:16 GMT References: <920@dgis.dtic.dla.mil> <5830@titcce.cc.titech.ac.jp> <5931@titcce.cc.titech.ac.jp> Organization: Ferranti International Controls Corporation Lines: 15 > >Signals can be reliably saved and restored, so they can continue to be > >inherited across spawn as they are now inherited across fork and exec. > If a parent process want to catch some signal (whose default action > is termination) and a child process want to ignore it, how can it > be done? Good point. Of course one more race condition in signals is just noise compared to the mess they are already in. I'm not familiar with the semantics of Berkeley's reliable signals, but I suspect that something could be done with them to resolve this. > BTW, signal is not an only thing you miss. Well, enlighten me. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' +1 713 274 5180. 'U`