OK to commit? - mishandled SIGCHLD ICE

Zack Weinberg zackw@stanford.edu
Thu Mar 8 15:17:00 GMT 2001


On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:13:59PM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote:
> > The hunch is that SIGCHLD get somewhat ignored in the first
> > case and not in the second.  ...  the SIGCHLD handler is set
> > to SIG_IGN and given that such signal setup is inherited by
> > child process, [GCC dies].
> 
> Outstanding detective work!  The problem with GCC, then, is that it
> is depending on being able to receive SIGCHLD (via wait4()), but
> does not ensure its delivery by checking to see if it has been set
> to SIG_IGN.

Please insert a comment explaining why this is necessary, so someone
doesn't take it out again.

zw



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list