On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Andrew Haley wrote: > Can you give us some idea of what kind of signals you want to handle?
potentially? off the top of my head, INT, TERM, HUP, ABRT, USR1/2 definitely, maybe things like WINCH and TSTP. Anything you would want to send with a ctrl-something or kill -SOMETHING and aren't immediately fatal like QUIT or KILL. > I'm not arguing against creating a signal library -- it might be a > good idea. What I am saying is that you're going to be quite > restricted as to what you can do legally. > > Because of the tight restrictions on what you can do in a signal > handler, I can't immediately see anything better than creating a > thread ahead of time and triggering that thread from the signal > handler. The thread, in turn, creates handler threads as required. > That way, it doesn't matter what thread receives the signal. This is a sensible way of doing it, but it would be nice to have some way of doing with without needing to write any C yourself. Also, signals which mean something really bad has happened and you can't continue are less important to catch. Matt -- Matthew Johnson http://www.matthew.ath.cx/ _______________________________________________ Classpathx-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpathx-discuss
