Re: [PATCH] lockfile: reset the correct signal
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- May 26, 2008, 21:36 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.DEB.1.00.0805262234210.30431@racer>
- In-Reply-To
- <20080526193513.GA9978@localhost>
Hi,
On Mon, 26 May 2008, Clemens Buchacher wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> In the function remove_lock_file_on_signal(), the signal handler > for SIGINT was reset, ignoring the parameter signo. > > This did not pose a problem yet, as remove_lock_file_on_signal() > was only registered as a SIGINT handler. > > Signed-off-by: Clemens Buchacher <drizzd@aon.at> > --- > > On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 10:34:11AM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Only from the patch did I understand that you actually meant: > > Thank you for fixing that.
Unfortunately, the original patch is already in git.git.
> I also realized that using signals like that can cause races. Shouldn't > we use sigaction() instead of signal()?
Dunno. The man page suggests it, but we have plenty of cases where we use signal(). And I think it might be less painful to implement a compat-wrapper for the platforms which differ from Linux' interpretation of signal().
Ciao, Dscho