Re: address@hidden: open-network-stream in batch mode causes SIGPOLL under GNU/Linux]

[Richard M. Stallman]

    The problem is that interrupt_input is always set, but the SIGIO handler
    is only installed in !noninteractive mode.  Now make-network-process has
    code to call request_sigio after it has finished if interrupt_input is
    non-zero, but nobody is handling the SIGIO.

    Probably the best fix is to make (un)request_sigio a no-op in
    noninteractive mode.

On general principles, it would seem that the best approach is to
handle the SIGIO, just as it would be handled in an interactive Emacs.
That would make all the process-related facilities work right, I would
think.  The only thing to handle differently would be terminal I/O
itself.

Why do you think it is better to make request_sigio a no-op?