On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 11:53:21AM +1100, Stephen Hocking wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In my efforts to make the xrdp port more robust under FreeBSD, I have
> discovered that sigwait (kind of an analogue to select(2), but for
> signals rather than I/O) re-enables ignored signals in its list under
> Linux,
Stephen Hocking schrieb:
> Hi all,
>
> In my efforts to make the xrdp port more robust under FreeBSD, I have
> discovered that sigwait (kind of an analogue to select(2), but for
> signals rather than I/O) re-enables ignored signals in its list under
> Linux, but not FreeBSD.
If the application re
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Matthias Andree wrote:
> Stephen Hocking schrieb:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In my efforts to make the xrdp port more robust under FreeBSD, I have
>> discovered that sigwait (kind of an analogue to select(2), but for
>> signals rather than I/O) re-enables ignored signals in
Am 09.10.2009, 03:38 Uhr, schrieb Stephen Hocking
:
It appears as if the documentation does not match up with the reality
in Linux's case. That's what the empirical evidence suggests anyway.
The code does does a waitpid after receiving the SIGCHLD to determine
what child process has exited and
On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 01:02:09PM +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 11:53:21AM +1100, Stephen Hocking wrote:
> > In my efforts to make the xrdp port more robust under FreeBSD, I have
> > discovered that sigwait (kind of an analogue to select(2), but for
> > signals rather tha
