Re: delete-process bug

[Kim F. Storm]

address@hidden (Michaël Cadilhac) writes:

> But it would be cleaner, indeed, to define the whole thing iff SIGCHLD
> is defined.
>
> I modified the patch for that (including in sigchld_handler and so
> because the list is not defined if SIGCHLD is not), and to make the
> insertion in deleted_processes_list before the kill.

Looking at the code once more, I noticed that sigchld_handler is only
installed (i.e. used) if SIGCHLD is defined, but it is defined unconditionally.

So conditioning the entire sigchld_handler in #ifdef SIGCHLD would be much 
cleaner IMO.


And to Eli:

I also saw how MS-Windows handles process termination without SIGCHLD.
Actually, it would do harm if SIGCHLD was ever defined on MS-Windows,
so perhaps we should explicitly add something like this after
all includes:


/* MS-Windows has its own way of detecting process termination.
   It does not normally define SIGCHLD, but just in case...  */
#ifdef WINDOWSNT
#undef SIGCHLD
#endif

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk