Hello Ian,
* Ian Beckwith wrote on Wed, May 19, 2010 at 03:54:52AM CEST:
* trap with signal numbers
According to http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/trap.html
(btw, am I right in saying The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 6
IEEE Std 1003.1, 2004 Edition is POSIX, or
On 5/19/2010 2:30 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Hello Ian,
* Ian Beckwith wrote on Wed, May 19, 2010 at 03:54:52AM CEST:
* trap with signal numbers
According tohttp://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/trap.html
(btw, am I right in saying The Open Group Base Specifications
Brian K. White br...@aljex.com writes:
I would have thought the portability concern would be the meanings of
the numbers more than the allowance of numbers in the syntax.
Even within a single OS linux, even within a single version, the
meanings of signals above 16 differ between
On 05/19/2010 12:30 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
POSIX requires signals specified as names (HUP, INT, etc),
although XSI allows numbers for certain signals (the ones used by
gnulib all fall into this category).
We've had a similar discussion about this on an Autoconf list a while
ago (with a
Hi,
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 08:30:13AM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
We've had a similar discussion about this on an Autoconf list a while
ago (with a Debian maintainer). The Autoconf manual, Shell Portability
chapter, lists 1 2 13 15 as signals which are safe to trap. I'm not
aware of any
Hi,
I got a bug report in debian about bashisms in gnulib
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=581105).
Working with a POSIX shell is a release goal for debian squeeze,
along with a switch to dash as /bin/sh.
I had a look with checkbashisms (from the devscripts package in debian
