Hello,
Julian Elischer wrote:
Jose Marcio Martins da Cruz wrote:
also, does the child do an exec() after forking?
No. The child gets out the father loop and calls another
initialisation function.
The Posix spec says that after a fork(0 teh child must do almost nothing
before calling
Jose Marcio Martins da Cruz wrote:
Hello,
Julian Elischer wrote:
Jose Marcio Martins da Cruz wrote:
also, does the child do an exec() after forking?
No. The child gets out the father loop and calls another
initialisation function.
The Posix spec says that after
On Jan 26, 2006, at 12:55 AM, Jose Marcio Martins da Cruz wrote:
Can you point me a good doc about threads, signals, and such kind
of things in
FreeBSD context ?
David Butenhof's book, Programming with POSIX Threads, includes a
good discussion of signals in the context of pthreads. How to
Jose Marcio Martins da Cruz wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
Jose Marcio Martins da Cruz wrote:
So, if I understood, the better I can do is, instead of letting the
child follow
a different path after the fork, he shall better do an exec of
another thing and
start a clean process...
it launches the signal handler
thread.
I solved this by replacing the signal handling of the father : using a handler
defined with sigaction instead of using a thread. But I'd like to understanding
what's wrong with this and what changed from FreeBSD 5.2.1 to 5.3
Thanks
Jose-Marcio
a SIGABRT and exits immediately when it launches the signal handler
thread.
I solved this by replacing the signal handling of the father : using a handler
defined with sigaction instead of using a thread. But I'd like to understanding
what's wrong with this and what changed from FreeBSD 5.2.1 to 5.3
Julian Elischer wrote:
Jose Marcio Martins da Cruz wrote:
a new threading library.
H.
Here are my compile flags :
CPPFLAGS : only some -I and -D flags
CFLAGS : -D_THREAD_SAFE -pthread
LDFLAGS : -lmilter -lkvm -lm -lpthread
have you tried 6.0?
Yes. It presents the same behaviour.
hello,
i have a daemon program and installed a
signal_handler() function for it. from signal_handler:
case SIGCHLD:
if ((wait(status)) == -1) return;
if (WIFSIGNALED(status)) return;
if (WIFSTOPPED(status)) return;
if (WIFEXITED(status)) return;
break;
in child process i am doing a
Hi,
I've got a problem with signal handling and threads.
I've reproduced the problem in a simple code.
Description of program:
install a signal handler SIGINT.
create a thread that do nothing except waiting.
main thread use poll to wait forever [ poll(,,-1) ].
user has too crtl-C
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, rmkml wrote:
Hi,
I've got a problem with signal handling and threads.
I've reproduced the problem in a simple code.
Description of program:
install a signal handler SIGINT.
create a thread that do nothing except waiting.
main thread use poll to wait forever [ poll
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: problem with signal handling and threads (fbsd49R)
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, rmkml wrote:
Hi,
I've got a problem with signal handling and threads.
I've reproduced the problem in a simple code.
Description of program:
install a signal
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, rmkml wrote:
please can you give me an example
of mask to SET BLOCK ou UNBLOCK
in both threads (main and run)
in order to make this sample code working ?
man pthread_sigmask
sigset_t set;
sigemptyset(set);
sigsetadd(set, SIGINT);
, I think, with no way to turn it off to get
historical behaviour for programs which needed it).
I hate POSIX signal handling...
-- Terry
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 09:55:03AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
The PIM Evolution, http://www.ximian.com/products/ximian_evolution/,
does not run on FreeBSD. The authors have made a change so that it will.
However, we would like to know if FreeBSD is the odd-man-out, or if the
authors were
Hi Hackers, et.al.
The PIM Evolution, http://www.ximian.com/products/ximian_evolution/,
does not run on FreeBSD. The authors have made a change so that it will.
However, we would like to know if FreeBSD is the odd-man-out, or if the
authors were lucky Evolution ran on Solaris and Linux.
-
Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 09:09:32, zaunere (Hans Zaunere) wrote about Signal Handling:
In a program that I am working on, I've decided to
catch signal 15, which then calls execl() in the
handler to reload the program from the on-disk binary.
I am able to send it the signal, it reloads
On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 09:11:58PM -0700, brian o'shea wrote:
On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 07:47:50PM -0700, Hans Zaunere wrote:
[...]
2) If a 10k binary is running, the signal is sent, and the program
is reloaded from disk, but is 100k (or 1k even) how does the
signal handling
/etc.
2) If a 10k binary is running, the signal is sent, and
the program is reloaded from disk, but is 100k (or 1k
even) how does the signal handling function get
called, taking into account what Stevens says. Steven
states that the sigmask remains for calls across exec,
so wouldn't the wrong
don't want the signal handler to be called while it
is already executing. Anybody else have some input on this?
2) If a 10k binary is running, the signal is sent, and
the program is reloaded from disk, but is 100k (or 1k
even) how does the signal handling function get
called, taking
[...]
2) If a 10k binary is running, the signal is sent,
and
the program is reloaded from disk, but is 100k (or
1k
even) how does the signal handling function get
called, taking into account what Stevens says.
Steven
states that the sigmask remains for calls across
exec,
so
On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 07:47:50PM -0700, Hans Zaunere wrote:
[...]
2) If a 10k binary is running, the signal is sent, and the program
is reloaded from disk, but is 100k (or 1k even) how does the
signal handling function get called, taking into account what
Stevens says. Steven
it is recieved? Why does the kernel
want to do this?
2) If a 10k binary is running, the signal is sent, and
the program is reloaded from disk, but is 100k (or 1k
even) how does the signal handling function get
called, taking into account what Stevens says. Steven
states that the sigmask remains
I'm wondering if anyone has the time or inclination to take a look at a fix
for PR bin/25110. We're having problems using a freshly-built 4.2-stable
box (technically 4.3 rc at this point), and the bug is still present.
I'm not sure how many people would see this problem (we see it because we
essentially have kevent() becoming the primary signal handling
mechanism in my program?
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Trent.
--
Trent Nelson - Software Engineer - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"A man with unlimited enthusiasm can achieve
almost anything." --unknown
To U
set all appropriate signals I want to monitor to SIG_IGN, I
can essentially have kevent() becoming the primary signal handling
mechanism in my program?
Correct.
--
Jonathan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
semop, as if it was unblocked by
successful semop.
Is this behaviour normal, and is there a way for the process to distinguish
between signal handling unblock and successful semop operation (may be by
setting a global variable in the signal-handling function) ?
Thank you in advance.
Vladimir
unblocked by
successful semop.
Is this behaviour normal, and is there a way for the process to
distinguish
between signal handling unblock and successful semop operation (may be
by
setting a global variable in the signal-handling function) ?
Thank you in advance.
Vladim
27 matches
Mail list logo
