Niels,
I don't quite get it. What's the point of passing signals (which is by
definition a pure implementation issue) across machinary boundaries? Other
than for user notification, that is, which should be done in textual form
anyway. Or have I missed something fundamental here?
Besides, using POSIX names for passing information about *nix signals from
one implementation to another seem to be a fairly good compromise. If one
system uses proprietary signals which is "unknown" by others, it's not very
useful to know it's machine representation anyway. And even if it would be a
machine to machine thing, they have had to agree on a common ground. POSIX
is one such.
So, there seem to be a flaw in the spec here. In the sense that it's not
completely implementation neutral. I'm suprised this hasn't come up earlier.
But it might also indicate that this is a non-issue, that is, no one really
care because it does not break anything.
Tomas Fasth
