On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, Ludovic Poitou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's the results I got with your test program on Solaris 8, OSF1,
> HP-UX, AIX.
[...]
> Results on Solaris 8:
> sigchld handler was called before waitpid (no status)
[...]
> Results on OSF1- V4.0 True64 - alpha
> sigchld handler was called before waitpid (no status)
[...]
> Results on HP-UX B.11.00 E 9000/715
> sigchld handler was called before waitpid (no status)
[...]
> Results on AIX 3.4
> sigchld handler was called before waitpid (no status)

On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, Jarda Benkovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE:
> sigchld handler was called before waitpid (no status)
> 
> IRIX 6.5 IP22:
> waitpid got the status before sigchld handler was called


Thanks Ludovic and Jarda for these very interesting results!

According to these results, the signal handlers of the plug-ins are
compatible with the following systems:
- Linux 2.2.x
- IRIX 6.5

But since May (when the signal handlers were changed, if I remember
correctly), the five plug-ins "screenshot", "gz", "bz2", "mail", and
"url" had no chance to work well on the following systems:
- Solaris 2.6 and 8
- OSF1
- HP-UX 11.x
- AIX 3.4
- FreeBSD 3.4

... and there was no bug report about this in the database!

Maybe we should all do our "mea culpa" and test a bit more seriously
especially on non-Linux platforms, now that 1.2 is just around the
corner.

By the way, could someone who works on the OS/2 port have a look at
the __EMX__ part of the code in plug-in/common/gz.c?  If possible,
after applying gimp-quinet-20001108-1.patch.gz that I uploaded to
ftp.gimp.org.  That code looks very suspicious to me.  It contains a
call to sleep(2) instead of using waitpid() for getting the output of
the child process.  The four other plug-ins are using waitpid() as
expected.  If the call to sleep() is the only way to get gz to work,
then the four other plug-ins should be changed (with some comments
explaining the problem).  If the other plug-ins work, then why is
there such an ugly hack in gz.c?

-Raphael

Reply via email to