On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:32:46 +0100
Christian Biere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The check is useless. Instead of signal(), sigaction() should be used.
> I don't think signal numbers are standardized either. SIGKILL could as
> well have the value 2. In this case, the second kill would never be
> reached regardless of the signal() implementation.
In my system SIGKILL is defined as 9, 2 is SIGINT, and by replacing
signal() it seems Configure passes without error. Should the script
is modified like that (but I don't know signal issues of other system)?
Index: Configure
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/gtk-gnutella/gtk-gnutella-current/Configure,v
retrieving revision 1.43
diff -u -r1.43 Configure
--- Configure 9 Dec 2004 06:25:20 -0000 1.43
+++ Configure 21 Dec 2004 14:23:42 -0000
@@ -4820,8 +4820,7 @@
int main()
{
- signal(2, foo);
- kill(getpid(), 2);
+ sigaction()(2, foo);
kill(getpid(), 2);
printf("abc\n");
}
Thank you.
--
Daichi
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/
_______________________________________________
Gtk-gnutella-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gtk-gnutella-devel
