Re: Make busybox more portable part deux

On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 23:18:46 + "Laurent Bercot" wrote: > >Not all systems have SA_RESTART, but signal_SA_RESTART_empty_mask() > >is required to build busybox. This at least allows you to build on > >systems without SA_RESTART. > > SA_RESTART is POSIX, and

Re: Make busybox more portable

Applied, thanks! On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 10:10 PM, Sean MacLennan wrote: > Move some distro specific include files into the appropriate #ifdef > blocks to make the code more portable. > > Signed-off-by: Sean MacLennan > --- > diff --git a/libbb/missing_syscalls.c

Re: Make busybox more portable part deux

Not all systems have SA_RESTART, but signal_SA_RESTART_empty_mask() is required to build busybox. This at least allows you to build on systems without SA_RESTART. SA_RESTART is POSIX, and supported at the very least on Linux, Free/Open/NetBSD, MacOS and Solaris. What system is there that

Make busybox more portable part deux

Not all systems have SA_RESTART, but signal_SA_RESTART_empty_mask() is required to build busybox. This at least allows you to build on systems without SA_RESTART. Signed-off-by: Sean MacLennan --- diff --git a/libbb/signals.c b/libbb/signals.c index 3f58932..591670e 100644 ---

Make busybox more portable

Move some distro specific include files into the appropriate #ifdef blocks to make the code more portable. Signed-off-by: Sean MacLennan --- diff --git a/libbb/missing_syscalls.c b/libbb/missing_syscalls.c index 0934128..36bb9f1 100644 --- a/libbb/missing_syscalls.c +++