> On Sept. 11, 2018, 11:14 p.m., Benjamin Mahler wrote:
> > Looks good! We should remove our libev patch file now, since (1) it's 
> > confusing (there's no explanation of why we have it; reading it seems to 
> > suggest it's needed for correctness, but it's not) and (2) makes upgrading 
> > libev more challenging (need to potentially adjust the patch file). Can you 
> > take care of that?

I'll try ti unbundle libev altogether in 
[MESOS-895](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-895)


- James


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/68660/#review208534
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Sept. 7, 2018, 4:46 p.m., James Peach wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/68660/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Sept. 7, 2018, 4:46 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Benjamin Bannier, Till Toenshoff, and Vinod Kone.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-9212
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-9212
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> libev will consume SIGCHLD signals by default, which interferes
> with a number of libprocess assumptions around dealing with child
> processes. The recommended way to disable this behavior is to reset
> the SIGCHLD signal handler after initializing the libeve default
> event loop.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/posix/libev/libev.cpp 
> 173ee466e61d3a754202213b94645e125ce0421a 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/68660/diff/2/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> configure with --with-libev=/usr, make check (Fedora 28)
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> James Peach
> 
>

Reply via email to