On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 11:07:13AM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote: > On Monday 17 September 2001 11:04 am, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > I know what the mails were about. I am simply stating that it is still completely > bogus. I disagree. It should be SIGUSR1 everywhere. As a compromise, I allowed configure to use SIGWINCH on Linux 2.0. Would it make more sense to give a fatal error on that platform? -- justin
- [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIGWINCH on ... Justin Erenkrantz
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Ryan Bloom
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Rodent of Unusual Size
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Justin Erenkrantz
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Ryan Bloom
- RE: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Sander Striker
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Rodent of Unusual Size
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Justin Erenkrantz
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Aaron Bannert
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Ryan Bloom
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Bill Stoddard
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Justin Erenkrantz
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Greg Stein
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Ryan Bloom
- Re: [PATCH] Switch back to SIGUSR1 and use SIG... Roy T. Fielding