On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 12:49:43 -0600, "Theo de Raadt" wrote: > > > How about "discard resources", or something more nebulous. Especially > > > if it frightens signal handler authors. > > > > I understand what you are getting at but that seems so vague as to > > be unhelpful. > > Precisely how is it vague?
It gives no indication of what resources might be allocated. > The manual is telling people to follow an open/close idiom, only in > certain circumstances. > > But in our cases, it doesn't close any fd. Or discard any resources. > It kind of does nothing. Sure, but we are the outlier here. On other systems there will be at least one file descriptor. > What we want to do is leave enough text that people will follow the > model. And warn them. But not be more precise than that. I understand what you mean, I'm just not convinced such nebulous language is helpful. - todd
