Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!indri!polyslo!vlsi3b15!lehi3b15!murrey
From: murrey@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU (Erik Murrey)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: System V / SIGCLD questions...
Message-ID: <567@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU>
Date: 13 May 89 00:56:59 GMT
References: <565@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU> <17457@mimsy.UUCP>
Reply-To: murrey@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU (Erik Murrey)
Organization: CSEE Dept. Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA
Lines: 36

In article <17457@mimsy.UUCP> chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes:
>In article <565@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU> murrey@lehi3b15.csee.Lehigh.EDU
>(Erik Murrey) writes:
>> ...
> ...
>This means that a catcher routine written as
>
>	catch()
>	{
>		int w, status;
>
>		signal(SIGCLD, catch);
>		w = wait(&status);
>	}
>
>recurses infinitely as soon as one child exits.

Yes, and in fact I tried this once before, and it did go into
an endless loop after the first catch().

So my solution is to reset the sigcld signal after the wait(). Doesn't
this leave a window where a child can die, and I won't ever know about
it?

At least they could have given me a SIG_HOLD...

.
.
.
.

-- 
Erik Murrey
Lehigh University
murrey@csee.Lehigh.EDU
erik@mpx.com