> > 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?
> >
> I just want some way to not ignore the signal. For example handle the
> signal after initialization of trap even if the signal is delivered
> during this initialization.
I don't think you are understanding what I'm proposing. Blocking the signal
with sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, ...) does the right thing.
--
``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/
