On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 09:45:05PM -0400, Dave Reisner wrote: > On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:27:31AM +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > > This will cause the code to break as soon as we handle another signal such > > as SIGWINCH... > > > > Signed-off-by: Allan McRae <al...@archlinux.org> > > --- > > > > Well... that didn't last long.
At least the comment is still fixed... :P > Seems to me the thing to do is to declare a mapping between signum and > handler, rather than declaring a signal handler for everything, and then > littering the logic with if/else. I think that is the right way forward as well. Cheers, Silvan
