Re: [RP] Solaris/CDE problem solved

[shawn]

>Envelope-to: address@hidden
>Delivery-date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 02:22:10 -0800
>From: Brian Lo Bue <address@hidden>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Sender: address@hidden
>X-BeenThere: address@hidden
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.0
>Precedence: bulk
>List-Help: <mailto:address@hidden>
>List-Post: <mailto:address@hidden>
>List-Subscribe: 
><http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/ratpoison-devel>,
>       <mailto:address@hidden>
>List-Id: <ratpoison-devel.lists.sourceforge.net>
>List-Unsubscribe: 
><http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/ratpoison-devel>,
>       <mailto:address@hidden>
>List-Archive: <http://lists.sourceforge.net/archives//ratpoison-devel/>
>Date: Fri,  5 Jan 2001 15:51:52 -0800 (PST)
>
>
>Hi All,
>
>If you've been looking at the list the past few days you've seen my
>attempt to get ratpoison to play nice with Solaris/CDE.  I've figured
>out what is going on.  
>
>Way back in the mist of time when a process called signal() the
>handler was only set for one invocation.  So you'd have to put another 
>signal() call in your handler so that the next signal would be
>handled.  As it turns out SVR4 systems, like Solaris, use the default
>old behavior for signal and BSD type systems reinstall the handler
>automatically.  I'm gonna infer from this that Linux reinstalls the
>handler since I'm pretty sure that this works on other people's
>machines.  Long story short, I changed the calls to a POSIX version
>rebuilt and now it behaves as expected.  The diffs follow:

Cool and Thanks! I'll take a look at the patch this weekend (hopefully :)...