On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 03:53:27PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> > + if (mask == -1) {
> > + perror ("umask");
>
> perror() is NOT async-safe (it manipulates stdio, and could permanently
> wedgelock the child if you happened to fork() while some other thread
> was also using stdio). Safe error reporting in a fork()d child is
> basically impossible; the best you can do is write() something back to
> the parent and let the parent do the error reporting. :(
Yup, I hate POSIX too. I'll change these to a write() call.
> > + if (waitpid (pid, &status, 0) == -1) {
> > + perrorf (g, "waitpid");
> > + return -1;
> > + }
>
> Doesn't this need to loop on EINTR, rather than immediately giving up?
I think that's a systematic error throughout libguestfs.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch
http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html
_______________________________________________
Libguestfs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
