Alexander Bluhm writes:
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 04:54:54PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>> I think programs should only block the absolutely critical things, and this
>> is overreach.
>
> Yes, blocking SIGINT and SIGQUIT is not clever. I thought there
> were races with
Yes, that's much better. It solves the problem, without trying to
solve other problems which don't exist.
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 04:54:54PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > I think programs should only block the absolutely critical things, and this
> > is overreach.
>
> Yes, blocking SIGINT
On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 04:54:54PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> I think programs should only block the absolutely critical things, and this
> is overreach.
Yes, blocking SIGINT and SIGQUIT is not clever. I thought there
were races with SIGCHLD and SIGTERM where only one process would
survive.
Hi,
While I was testing syslogd with SIGHUP, it sometimes died. This
seems to happen if the signal hits the process durig its initilisation
phase. I think we should block the signals until the handler in
both processes are installed.
ok?
bluhm
Index: usr.sbin/syslogd/privsep.c