Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 04:22:33PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:Daniel Veillard wrote:On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 03:39:51PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:we should test the return value to check for an error there, the unfortunate thing is that since we are in a signal handler there isn'tI'm not sure if this is the right way to solve this, but it is a way.much we can do, I suggest to increment a global variable (which could for example be checked if we hit that problem by some other code in the main loop). Other ideas ?How about this patch. It implements your suggestion.yup, better than I would have done myself (didn't knew there was a specific type sig_atomic_t for atomic access...).
Committed to CVS. Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ 64 Baker Street, London, W1U 7DF Mobile: +44 7866 314 421 "[Negative numbers] darken the very whole doctrines of the equations and make dark of the things which are in their nature excessively obvious and simple" (Francis Maseres FRS, mathematician, 1759)
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature