> Paolo Carlini wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I mean, why a well designed application should refuse to listen to
> > ctrl-c when something goes wrong? Why every time for some reason it
> gets
> > stuck, I have to kill it from another shell? That's definitely
> annoying.
> >
> > Paolo.
> ...
> Looks like there's a read loop in libapr that is deliberately
> designed to
> continue if it gets EINTR. Perhaps a somewhat crude mechanism for
> guaranteeing atomicity/preventing corrupted sandbox?
Not just crude, but wrong. You can't get atomicity (or rather,
transactional integrity) that way, because blocking ^C doesn't block
SIGKILL, or panics, or power failures, or (in the case of operations
involving the server) network failures.
paul
