Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] signal: Teach sigsuspend to use set_user_sigmask

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/10, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Personally I don't think anyone sane would intentionally depend on this
> and I don't think there is a sufficiently reliable way to depend on this
> by accident that people would actually be depending on it.

Agreed.

As I said I like these changes and I see nothing wrong. To me they fix the
current behaviour, or at least make it more consistent.

But perhaps this should be documented in the changelog? To make it clear
that this change was intentional.

Oleg.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux