From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p73AuFQ2148725 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 05:56:15 -0500 Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:56:13 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] xfsdump: convert to the POSIX signal API Message-ID: <20110803105613.GA7030@infradead.org> References: <1311972011-1446-1-git-send-email-wkendall@sgi.com> <1311972011-1446-5-git-send-email-wkendall@sgi.com> <20110803104813.GA3575@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110803104813.GA3575@infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Bill Kendall Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 06:48:13AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Why yare all these sigaction calls needed? As far as I can see > there is no way we'll ever use a different signal handler than > "sigaction" for any signal, so simply modifying the signal mask > should be enough. Sorry, the on eand only signal handler is called "sighandler" of course. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs