On 4/12/11 11:04 PM, Roman Rakus wrote:
> On 04/12/2011 03:30 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> Probably because it's very old code. That has been there essentially
>> unchanged since at least bash-1.12 -- almost twenty years ago. It would
>> be better to block the signal while the trap string and handler are
>> being modified.
>>
>> Chet
> Thanks for the answer. And what about to not ignore the signal, but use
> some help handler, which will store the information that the signal is
> caught and then after the trap handler is initialized check that
> information? Or some documentation note about this?
I'm not sure I understand this. Why is using a temporary handler better
than blocking the signal until the trap handler is in place, then
unblocking it and allowing any pending signal to be delivered?
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU c...@case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
