From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7075 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2008 23:57:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 30609 invoked by uid 48); 18 Nov 2008 23:56:38 -0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:57:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20081118235638.30608.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "rsa at us dot ibm dot com" To: glibc-bugs@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20070704013541.4737.nmiell@comcast.net> References: <20070704013541.4737.nmiell@comcast.net> Reply-To: sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug libc/4737] fork is not async-signal-safe X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC Mailing-List: contact glibc-bugs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: glibc-bugs-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-11/txt/msg00054.txt.bz2 ------- Additional Comments From rsa at us dot ibm dot com 2008-11-18 23:56 ------- Tom's suggestion: "Another possible solution for this problem would be to just not call atfork registered handlers at all if fork is called from within the context of a signal handler." ... seems to be what the IEEE interpretation recommends and I've thought as well that it might be a potential solution. Ulrich will have to decide whether this is an approach he'd accept. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4737 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.