[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Obsolete SIGRTMAX-n signal names
|
From: |
Harald Hoyer |
|
Subject: |
Re: Obsolete SIGRTMAX-n signal names |
|
Date: |
Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:19:45 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130311 Thunderbird/17.0.4 |
On 04/24/2013 05:26 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 4/23/13 2:05 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote:
>> As reported in http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?8025 , I would like to see the
>> SIGRTMAX-n signal names disappear.
>>
>> Signals should never ever be addressed with SIGRTMAX-n. Signals should
>> always be
>> addressed with SIGRTMIN+n.
>
> I'll take a look at this, but that's a pretty strong statement to make from
> something that appears in one Linux man page. I can't find any shell in my
> quick testing that behaves as you propose. Is there any other reason to do
> this?
>
> Chet
>
>
Well, the value SIGRTMAX-n might change, if SIGRTMAX grows. SIGRTMIN+n should be
constant. So, users should not be encouraged to use SIGRTMAX-n.