On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Steffers wrote:
 
> fair enough, always willing to conceed that i can be wrong
> +BUT+ 
> since signal-11 is a 'well defined' unix standard meaning 
> hardware 'error' isnt it rather a bad signal to choose for a
> non-hardware error ?
> 
> (hell, even HP-UX uses sig11 for hardware error)

i don't keep track of the numbers, but this report was a SIGSEGV, which is
not a hardware error.

Reply via email to