Two more systems that are different from Linux. So far, Linux is the odd ball out. -- Steve On Fri, 2005-08-12 at 22:28 +0100, someone else wrote: > > SunOS hostname 5.10 Generic sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Blade-1000 > > sa_mask blocks other signals > SA_NODEFER does not block other signals > SA_NODEFER does not affect sa_mask > SA_NODEFER and sa_mask blocks sig > !SA_NODEFER blocks sig > SA_NODEFER does not block sig > sa_mask blocks sig > > > OSF1 hostname V5.1 2650 alpha > > sa_mask blocks other signals > SA_NODEFER does not block other signals > SA_NODEFER does not affect sa_mask > SA_NODEFER and sa_mask blocks sig > !SA_NODEFER blocks sig > SA_NODEFER does not block sig > sa_mask blocks sig > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
- From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
- From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
- From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] Fix i386 signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask (was: Re: Signal handling possibly wrong)
- From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- From: Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>
- Re: Signal handling possibly wrong
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2.6.12.3] PCI/libata INTx cleanup
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] cpm_uart: Fix spinlock initialization
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC signal handling of NODEFER, should not affect sa_mask
- Index(es):
