On Sat, 29 Jan 2005, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:

On Sat, Jan 29, 2005 at 09:36:31PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can everyone who is maintaining downstream packages please chaeck that
the code in their package ends up looking like what the patch below
acheives.

[...]

        case EXP_STARTED:
-               sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, &ready_sigs, NULL);
                ap.state = ST_EXPIRE;
+               sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, &ready_sigs, NULL);
                return 0;
        }
        return 1;

The Debian packages are close, but not quite:

       case EXP_STARTED:
               sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, &lock_sigs, NULL);
               ap.state = ST_EXPIRE;
               sigprocmask(SIG_SETMASK, &ready_sigs, NULL);
               return 0;

I have no idea what lock_sigs does, but this should be OK, no?

It's just the list of signals that are blocked while we do "stuff" that we don`t want interrupted by something else.


Similarly ready_sigs contains the signals we expect to be received in normal operation.

The first sigprocmask call above does nothing as signals are already blocked at that point.

Ian

_______________________________________________
autofs mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs

Reply via email to