On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 10:03:03AM -0800, Tim McClarren <[email protected]>
wrote:
>>> of ev_signal was to attempt to deliver asynchronous signals
>>> synchronously.
>>
>> Exactly - so what do you expect?
>
> I'd expect libev to not catch it, I think... if the behavior of the
> example code is as intended, let's leave it at that. I'm not sure I'm
> an idiot for thinking it might call back into the handler on SEGV. If
Not sure who claimed you are an idiot, but you don't understand SIGSEGV and
how it works.
> there was absolutely no reason for you to ever have a handler for SEGV,
Well, no.
> then I'm guessing that the POSIX spec. would treat it the same as
> SIGKILL.
Well, no.
What you are trying is to magically recover from sigsegv.
>>> I am trying to emit a stack to the log. I've done this before, via the
>>> usually sigaction route.
>>
>> Again, you know you can't continue, so why bother?
>
> Because I want the call stack?
You can't get it that way - when you handler is called from the event
loop, you will have the call stack from the event loop.
> Anyways, changing back to using sigaction for getting the stack is easy
> enough.
Yes, and it makes sense for your case.
--
The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
-----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net
----==-- _ generation
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [email protected]
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
_______________________________________________
libev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.schmorp.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libev
