Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 7/7/83; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rlgvax!tom
From: tom@rlgvax.UUCP (Tom Beres)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Interprocess Communication: Messages & Monitors
Message-ID: <1194@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 26-Sep-83 11:00:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.1194
Posted: Mon Sep 26 11:00:52 1983
Date-Received: Wed, 28-Sep-83 03:12:42 EDT
References: <2307@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 14

The question was "Why not reset signals to IGNORE rather than DEFAULT?".

The "obvious" answer given ("because there would be no way to stop
runaway programs") is incorrect.  Signal 9 ("Kill", or "DIE, you *##*@, DIE!")
can never be caught or ignored, so there is no way it could ever be reset
to IGNORE, and any runaway process could always be terminated with a
"kill -9" signal.

Perhaps the real answer has to do with catching your own memory faults, or
something along those lines, I haven't thought it out.  Perhaps the real
answer was shortsidedness?

- Tom Beres
{seismo, allegra, mcnc, brl-bmd, we13}!rlgvax!tom