On Jan 30 16:48, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jan 30 11:44, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Jan 29 18:21, Dan Bonachea wrote:
> > > > A minimal test program is copied below and also available here:
> > > > https://upc-bugs.lbl.gov/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=589
> > > 
> > > > It's worth noting POSIX 1003.1-2016 sec XRAT.B.2.4.1 (p.3577)
> > > > specifically requires that any given signal should be delivered to
> > > > exactly one thread. Also the spec for abort (p.565) requires the
> > > > signal to be delivered as if by `raise(SIGABRT)` (p.1765) aka.
> > > > `pthread_kill(pthread_self(),SIGABRT)` (p.1657), which implies
> > > > any registered SIGABRT handler should run only on the thread
> > > > which called abort().
> > > 
> > > Poking around further, I find that replacing the signal generation
> > > code in the test program for all cases with :
> > > 
> > >   pthread_kill(pthread_self(),sigid)
> > > 
> > > generates compliant signal delivery behavior!
> > 
> > Thanks, I fixed that in Cygwin.  It will be part of the 3.0 release.
> 
> I think I have a solution for the SISEGV misbehaviour.  I have to
> test it a bit but this may make it into Cygwin 3.0 if all is well.

Please try the latest developer snapshot from https://cygwin.com/snapshots/
or the new 3.0.0-0.3 test release.  I hope this fixes the problem
sufficiently.


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Maintainer