Hi Kostik,
2015-07-11 22:56 GMT+02:00 Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com:
Bucket 2: The system call could also just fail and return an error
(MSG_NOSIGPIPE).
SIGPIPE exists to ensure that naive programs do something reasonable
when their stdout suddenly goes away. Or, transposing the
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 12:22:51PM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote:
Ah, okay. Now I think I understand what you're hinting at. So your
proposal is to let cloudabi_sys_proc_raise() only call into
sys_kill(), nothing else. We then reset all signals to their default
behavior at some point during process
Hi Kostik,
Exactly. I think that for programs that are built around pipelines,
where a series of processes have stdin/stdout attached, having
something like SIGPIPE makes sense. So far the focus
It looks like I accidentally truncated the last sentence. Sorry about that.
So far the focus with
On 11 Jul 2015, at 21:56, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote:
Bucket 2: The system call could also just fail and return an error
(MSG_NOSIGPIPE).
SIGPIPE exists to ensure that naive programs do something reasonable
when their stdout suddenly goes away. Or, transposing the PoV, it
Author: ed
Date: Sat Jul 11 19:41:31 2015
New Revision: 285404
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/285404
Log:
Implement normal and abnormal process termination.
CloudABI does not provide an explicit kill() system call, for the reason
that there is no access to the global
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 07:41:31PM +, Ed Schouten wrote:
Author: ed
Date: Sat Jul 11 19:41:31 2015
New Revision: 285404
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/285404
Log:
Implement normal and abnormal process termination.
CloudABI does not provide an explicit kill()
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 10:36:59PM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote:
Hi Kostik,
2015-07-11 21:47 GMT+02:00 Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com:
This is very strange and unmaintanable approach. Also, you cannot handle
traps this way.
Yes. That's a pretty good observation.
Some time ago I
Hi Kostik,
2015-07-11 21:47 GMT+02:00 Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com:
This is very strange and unmaintanable approach. Also, you cannot handle
traps this way.
Yes. That's a pretty good observation.
Some time ago I thought about this and my view is that signals can be
grouped in three
