Remove dependency on signal() function #2813
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Replaces uses of signal() with sigaction() which should be far more portable.
matt335672
force-pushed
the
remove_signal_call
branch
from
b906b60
to
a704da9
Compare
matt335672
force-pushed
the
remove_signal_call
branch
from
a704da9
to
d098214
Compare
|
I'm merging this now, as the tests pass on Linux, FreeBSD and even OpenIndiana |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Replaces uses of signal() with sigaction() which should be far more portable.
Tested on Linux and FreeBSD. See also #2811
sigaction() has been in POSIX since 2001, so I've not felt it necessary to add any feature tests for this.
@mstone2001 - this should solve a lot of your System-V issues I hope. Please review if you have the time.
Edit: I've added unit tests for the signal functions now, as these will be very useful in tracking down any odd behaviour in #2811 and maybe others