home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: montnaro@sprite.uucp (Skip Montanaro)
-
- Perhaps this has been discussed before, but I've only recently begun
- reading this group.
-
- At the recent USENIX conference in Phoenix the issue of signal
- handling came up in relation to the MACH kernel. It seems that signals
- and threads (or lightweight processes, if you will) don't fit together
- very well. If you think about it for a bit, it's hard to decide which
- thread should catch a signal: the active thread? the one that set the
- signal? some designated signal catcher? The MACH types have hacked
- something together. (I think they decided the active thread would
- catch it, but don't quote me.)
-
- My question is, has the POSIX group discussed any alternatives to the
- signal facility?
-
- Mail me your replies. I'll summarize if there's any interest.
-
- Skip| ARPA: montanaro@ge-crd.arpa
- Montanaro| UUCP: montanaro@desdemona.steinmetz.ge.com
- (518)387-7312| GE DECnet: advax::"montanaro@desdemona.steinmetz.ge.com"
-
- Volume-Number: Volume 11, Number 73
-
-