Tim Peters wrote at 2004-5-23 14:46 -0400:
>> ... Not blocking signals that should not be blocks according to
>>     PThreads standard ...

>> Moreover, I doubt that such problems will be significant in practise:
>As above, the original signal-blocking patch was added for reasons "in
>practice" that appeared sufficient at the time.  If you want to argue that,
>the right (helpful) place to do so is in a comment attached to the bug

You have snipped my explanation why I am convinced that the patch
can only improve things!

I have not argued that there was no case to block *some* signals,
just not the ones that the operating system uses to signal
major problems -- SIGSEGV, SIGBUS, ... and friends.
The patch states that the pthreads standard says that such signals
should not be blocked.

This is a Python issue independent of the bug in LinuxThreads.

> ...
>An alternative to maintaining your own Python, and/or your own Linux, is to
>move to the current Linux thread implementation (NPTL), which doesn't have
>the LinuxThread signal bug that's the deeper cause of Zope's problems (on
>Linux boxes using LinuxThreads).

Our system administrators have been sceptical to switch to NPTL support.
They say, there are still some problems about it.

I will reraise the question and
see what my colleagues feel as the less problematic way:
use NPTL or our own Python version.


Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to