Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!lll-crg!seismo!rochester!cornell!batcomputer!garry From: garry@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU (Garry Wiegand) Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: Subtle bug in fflush and fix Message-ID: <603@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU> Date: Fri, 11-Jul-86 00:45:26 EDT Article-I.D.: batcompu.603 Posted: Fri Jul 11 00:45:26 1986 Date-Received: Sat, 12-Jul-86 04:45:33 EDT Reply-To: garry%cadif-oak@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu Organization: Cornell Engineering && Flying Moose Graphics Lines: 14 In a recent article gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) ) wrote: >... >The problems are not as well known as they should be. Signals >can impact the design of much of the C library. AT&T reworked >the standard I/O routines in an attempt to permit the use of >printf() in a signal handler, but they didn't get it quite right >because it is NOT POSSIBLE to get it right, at least not without >severe performance impact... I can see it would be tough to do at user level. But I don't see why the kernel read() and write() routines can't hang a simple queue on their front ends. Elucidate, please? -- garry wiegand (garry%cadif-oak@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu)