From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers-win32 <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: signals on windows |
Date: | 2003-10-10 17:37:53 |
Message-ID: | 3F86EE71.6050700@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>It doesn't look like a "signal" is not a kernel primitive on NT, it's a
>>
>>
>>feature of the CRT implemented in userspace with lower-level OS
>>
>>
>primitives.
>
>That is correct. Signals in the Unix sense of the word do not exist in
>win32. A subset of them was emulated by the C runtime for compatibility
>with dos applications. All real win32 process messaging goes through
>messages.
>
>Exception handling, however, is a kernel primitive, and handles some
>cases like int/0 that normally would be handled by signals. Microsoft
>hacked the C language to include exception support for this reason.
>
>
>
OK, so the practical question facing me is "am I doing the right thing
for signal handling on Windows in initdb.c, or is something else needed?"
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-10-12 17:13:41 | Re: [HACKERS] initdb |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2003-10-10 17:08:46 | Re: signals on windows |