Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Also, are there any systems targetted by gnulib where raise() still does not > exist (even though C89 requires it)?
I suspect there are. It is a bit of an unexplored corner, since as 'raise' wasn't in 7th Edition Unix, so old code didn't use it. Maybe uClibc on the ARM? See, for example: <http://osdir.com/ml/lib.uclibc.buildroot/2006-10/msg00139.html> <http://svn.exactcode.de/t2/branches/6.0/package/base/uclibc/arm-raise.patch> > Or can I go ahead and clean up > sigprocmask.c and fatal-signal.c to blindly assume the existence of raise, as > well as delete the raise module? How about this more-conservative idea: Keep the raise module, and blindly assume the existence of 'raise' elsewhere.
