Re: SIGPIPE handling

Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >>
> >>+ /*
> >>+ * We could lose a signal during this test.
> >>+ * In a multi-threaded application, this might
> >>+ * be a problem. Do any non-threaded platforms
> >>
> Threaded or non-threaded?

OK, yea, I will use threaded.

> >>+ * lack sigaction()?
> >>+ */
> >>
> Additionally, the problem is not restricted to multithreaded apps:
> signal(,SIG_IGN) clears all pending signals.

Oh, yuck. Would SIG_DFL be better here? I am thinking of adding
sigblock into that code on the assumption that if they have signal(),
they have sigblock(). Should we disable threaded builds unless they
have sigaction()?

I suppose the sigblock() would take care of the pending signal problem
too.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073