Hi!
On Wed, Oct 13, 1999 at 07:50:13PM +0200, Guido Flohr wrote:
> I would propose to "sacrifice" SIGSYS ("invalid argument to system call")
> instead. This signal is never generated by the kernel and I have never
> seen it used in source code.
Erm, have you looked at bios.c, dos.c, slb.c and xbios.c? They all
contain at least one line "raise(SIGSYS)". I wouldn't call that "never
generated by the kernel" ;)
> IMHO the operating system should return EINVAL instead of raising a
> signal when a wrong argument is given to a system call (and in fact
> that is what MiNT does).
Well, it _is_ used, and that's mostly for things were a program tried
something "nasty", e.g. Supexec() without the necessary priveleges,
where continuing won't make much sense.
> Anybody having problems with re-interpreting SIGSYS as SIGPWR from now
> on?
Well, what exactly did you do when trying to use SIGPWR as signal 31?
Increase NSIG to 32 and add SIGPWR as 31 to signals.h? That alone caused
the kernel to crash, or what happened?
Ciao
Thomas
--
Thomas Binder (Gryf @ IRCNet) gryf@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de
PGP-key available on request! binder@rbg.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/
Attachment:
pgpiFXIEwBpcG.pgp
Description: PGP signature