From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 71777 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2017 00:36:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 71754 invoked by uid 89); 25 Mar 2017 00:36:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*Ad:D*cx, UD:php, door X-HELO: mail-qt0-f195.google.com Received: from mail-qt0-f195.google.com (HELO mail-qt0-f195.google.com) (209.85.216.195) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 25 Mar 2017 00:36:15 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f195.google.com with SMTP id r5so768415qtb.2 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2017 17:36:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RlB/BZSbeGbzF1qv1khtjTtuRFGkmGXm8E+ZsqPM7/Q=; b=qbfpmreDGi2sLPSJtieX7adU2jUPtcSdgichYpcAMQPgWIVa7sn0a6TqgniOEikaEG i9pv7VTfbVPrWU0c1rWIlxZTQ+l8Ii9movMQ/YkZG8bay7nJdmCJPg+pNtWUtFOznBNh oih2VOQvwKPDuQADT6jvQ9fWlRwEBpDJ5GQJpamAPLDUIJYrK7kAAEznokL7KV94a2OC TzKQhrjFGPX2DeFayDmf7xdHXlWD5Uf5SNXn4ftiK1VzeO/fbfDCSqpxaj3Ov6A6Z/kj lkb74mHkD7nu9wZ5gmzsNkq9ONeH9aQpYw1dPnxBZ6ldFaE98wX7sWWTic3X4eTsdd7h eHbg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1qQsRhLZamyxcNQ9fN7MF4Gzs+vbxnxoS0Qrbv9nSuw6JL2o31yM2L9m5IezbKoTwsWLCUDsAtbYwdwQ== X-Received: by 10.200.46.91 with SMTP id s27mr11585491qta.278.1490402175245; Fri, 24 Mar 2017 17:36:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.200.39.162 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Mar 2017 17:35:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <306c1ba1-db66-f55f-3ab7-3b3eefd4564c@redhat.com> References: <1490324519-11228-1-git-send-email-yszhou4tech@gmail.com> <2b0bab84-e36e-e109-5444-dc84369dddce@redhat.com> <39f28782-65e8-0f52-3c8f-134a6f05788b@redhat.com> <306c1ba1-db66-f55f-3ab7-3b3eefd4564c@redhat.com> From: Yousong Zhou Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 00:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix invalid sigprocmask call To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, musl@lists.openwall.com, Rich Felker , Andreas Schwab Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-SW-Source: 2017-03/txt/msg00453.txt.bz2 On 24 March 2017 at 21:37, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 03/24/2017 01:05 PM, Yousong Zhou wrote: >> On 24 March 2017 at 20:55, Pedro Alves wrote: >>> The standard wasn't built on a vacuum. It starts by ratifying common >>> implementation behavior. If no historical implementation behaves like what >>> you're suggesting, what's the point of enforcing that, when it's clearly >>> NOT the intent? You're just causing porting pain for no good reason. >>> Please file a bug against the standard to have the error section clarified instead. >> >> Lol, now I will consider the idea of bumping the door of POSIX committee ;) > > No need. Go here: > > http://austingroupbugs.net/ Thanks for the pointer. Here is the issue link http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1132 Regards, yousong