On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 04:35:24PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi,. > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 11:18:57 +0300 > Konstantin Belousov <kostik...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 08:37:40AM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 13:43:51 +0300 > > > > > > and it works there. > > > > > > So, it is just a matter of time until the fix finds its way back to > > > 10? > > Yes, should be several days timeframe. > > this sounds perfect. > > > > > > > > Of course, I do not ignore the signal now in the application > > > anymore. The application then works as expected on 10.2 STABLE. > > Well, the consequence of the bug, which affected you, is that it was > > allowed for the applications to ignore SIGCANCEL. With the bug fixed, > > the signal(SIGCANCEL, anything) becomes nop. > > Was it just me being blind or is the documentation on this a bit > limited?
Documentation on what ? SIGCANCEL is non-standard signal, it is not documented because this is internal facility for the threading library. Fiddling with anything without understanding the functionality is not the best idea. _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
