I received this from someone. I'm BCCing him since he didn't email to the LKML himself (for some reason, maybe he doesn't want spam), I'll protect his identity. If he wants to take credit, he should CC everyone.
On Fri, 2005-08-12 at 13:16 -0700, Someone wrote: > DU4 > === > [3] uname -a > OSF1 hostname V4.0 878 alpha > [4] ./test_signal > sa_mask blocks other signals > SA_NODEFER does not block other signals > SA_NODEFER does not affect sa_mask The above here is what the patch does, and NOT what Linux currently does. > SA_NODEFER and sa_mask blocks sig Same goes for the above here. > !SA_NODEFER blocks sig > SA_NODEFER does not block sig > sa_mask blocks sig > > AIX > === > [36] uname -a > AIX hostname 2 5 000A1B9A4C00 > [37] ./test_signal > sa_mask blocks other signals > SA_NODEFER does not block other signals > SA_NODEFER does not affect sa_mask > SA_NODEFER and sa_mask blocks sig Strike two. looks good for the patch. > !SA_NODEFER blocks sig > SA_NODEFER does not block sig > sa_mask blocks sig > > Irix 6.5 > ======== > [9] uname -a > IRIX hostname 6.5 07201607 IP22 > [10] ./test_signal > sa_mask blocks other signals > SA_NODEFER does not block other signals > SA_NODEFER does not affect sa_mask > SA_NODEFER and sa_mask blocks sig Strike three, your out! > !SA_NODEFER blocks sig > SA_NODEFER does not block sig > sa_mask blocks sig > So Linux is not compliant with other unices. So I guess I'll get going on sending in patches for each architecture. Oh, just to show you what Linux shows without the patch: $ uname -a Linux bilbo 2.6.12 #2 SMP Wed Jul 20 20:07:59 EDT 2005 i686 GNU/Linux $ ./test_signal sa_mask blocks other other signals SA_NODEFER does not block other signals SA_NODEFER affects sa_mask SA_NODEFER and sa_mask does not block sig !SA_NODEFER blocks sig SA_NODEFER does not block sig sa_mask blocks sig And with the patch: $ uname -a Linux goliath 2.6.13-rc3 #5 SMP Fri Aug 12 14:39:38 EDT 2005 i686 GNU/Linux $ ./test_signal sa_mask blocks other signals SA_NODEFER does not block other signals SA_NODEFER does not affect sa_mask SA_NODEFER and sa_mask blocks sig !SA_NODEFER blocks sig SA_NODEFER does not block sig sa_mask blocks sig -- Steve - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
