Hi,
> > Do you have a reference of a description of this behaviour in an other
> > system,
> > specification or standard?
> >
>
> C89 (7.7.1.1), C99 (7.14.1.1), POSIX 2001 and 2008 all say that "the
> equivalent of signal(sig, SIG_DFL)" may be executed prior to executing
> the signal handler
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 09:27:35AM +0200, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 12:05:48AM +0200, François-Xavier Carton wrote:
> > Technically, no standard guarantees that the handler stays after being
> > called once. The implementation could reset it to the default action.
> > One
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 12:05:48AM +0200, François-Xavier Carton wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 07:26:40AM +0600, NRK wrote:
> > die() calls vprintf, fputc and exit; none of these are
> > async-signal-safe, see `man 7 signal-safety`.
> > ---
> > dwm.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 12:05:48AM +0200, François-Xavier Carton wrote:
> Technically, no standard guarantees that the handler stays after being
> called once. The implementation could reset it to the default action.
Hmm, didn't know about that.
> One may want to re-add a call to signal here,
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 07:26:40AM +0600, NRK wrote:
> die() calls vprintf, fputc and exit; none of these are
> async-signal-safe, see `man 7 signal-safety`.
> ---
> dwm.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dwm.c b/dwm.c
> index 5646a5c..8358fb0 100644
>
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 07:26:40AM +0600, NRK wrote:
> die() calls vprintf, fputc and exit; none of these are
> async-signal-safe, see `man 7 signal-safety`.
> ---
> dwm.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dwm.c b/dwm.c
> index 5646a5c..8358fb0 100644
>
