On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Ortmann, Michael
> I'm not sure. The last sigprocmask call restores the original signal mask of
> the thread.
> It looks kind of pointless since the two blocked signals are unblocked by the
> sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK) call in the next loop iteration.
> The comment added in the iputils code talks about signal mask inheritance. In
> my case arping was called via system() from a boost io_service thread for
> which most signals were blocked. At least the SIG_UNBLOCK before recvfrom
> makes sense in this case.
Expect many other programs to get confused in such a case.
> Since I don't know the consequences of removing that last sigprocmask() call
> I would let it stay like in the iputils arping at GitHub.
I deleted it since now it's superfluous.
busybox mailing list