On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:21 PM, <chri...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > We've found a bug in the syscall package (see > https://github.com/opencontainers/runc/issues/1364), and the better solution > seems to be to move from syscall to sys. I've started updating some of the > runc code to see how big of a change it would be, and have gotten a bit off > in the weeds. I'd like some advice on how to properly switch over. > > The thing that is initially confusing me is the use of syscall's Signal. For > example, "sig := syscall.Signal(s)" (when handling signals a user might send > to a container's processes). Instead of using type syscall.Signal, is there > a sys type that is a direct replacement for Signal? It doesn't look like it > to me. > > I don't see a direct translation for Signal(0), either, and digging around > in the syscall code, nothing jumped out. > > It seems that it might be simplest to leave in syscall in some places but > use x/sys most of the time.
Currently as you can see x/sys/unix still uses syscall.Signal. That should probably be cleaned up with a new type defined in x/sys/unix (that still implements the os.Signal interface). But the bug you are encountering seems entirely independent of this Signal issue. I wouldn't worry about tackling Signal just to fix some terminal ioctls. Ian -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
