In the last episode (Mar 24), Dave Hayes said:
> Dan Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In the last episode (Mar 23), Dave Hayes said:
> > > I have a relatively simple threaded TCP server that services high
> > > volumes of requests. Currently it appears to randomly crash
> > > receiving a SIGPIPE.
>
> But it's not doing what I want it to do.
>
> I don't want my process with all it's threads to terminate if I write
> on a pipe with no reader. I want the write() to return EPIPE so I can
> handle it there. It's not doing that currently. Installing a signal
> handler doesn't work to get it to do that. Ignoring the signal
> doesn't work. I've used both signal() and sigaction() semantics to no
> avail.
So what you're saying is that even if you ignore SIGPIPE, your process
still dies with SIGPIPE? That definitely should not happen, and
probably counts as a kernel bug (signal is not wrapped by libc_r so
threads shouldn't affect anything).
--
Dan Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
