Re: [PATCH 2/2 v3] Demangler crash handler

[Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com>]

Doug Evans wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > > From: Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com>
> > > >
> > > > Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > > > > From: Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Eli pointed out that SIGSEGV is an ANSI-standard signal
> > > > > > but I found various other SIGSEGV checks in GDB
> > > > >
> > > > > They should all be removed.
> > > >
> > > > Ok, I'll do this.  Should I commit the change as obvious?
> > >
> > > I think so, yes.
> >
> > Ok, I'll do that.
> 
> Are we talking about #ifdef SIGSEGV in, e.g., common/signals.c?

Yes.

> If one goes down this path, I think the patch while perhaps
> "obvious" would become a bit involved (why just SEGV?) and
> thus the obviousness diminishes.
> I think it diminishes to a point where the obviousness is gone.
> Please submit any such patch for review.

Having started looking into this I am inclined to agree.

I couldn't find an authoritative list, but the Linux kernel sources
indicate that SIGINT, SIGILL, SIGABRT, SIGFPE, SIGSEGV and SIGTERM
are ANSI.  Eli said that list agreed with his references, so I'll
work on unwrapping those.

I will post the patch for review.

Thanks,
Gary

-- 
http://gbenson.net/