Re: [Help-gnutls] avoiding signals completely

[Rupert Kittinger-Sereinig]

Daniel Stenberg schrieb:
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2006, Rupert Kittinger-Sereinig wrote:
>
> > > May I suggest that we at least add an option that avoids signals when 
> > > using GnuTLS? It would be a matter of using the fourth send() 
> > > argument on most platforms, and the SO_NOSIGPIPE socket option on 
> > > some. We already do this magic in libcurl.
> >
> > Why not simply disable SIGPIPE for the whole application with 
> > sigaction()?
>
> Yes, that's one way to do it for an application. But that's not a 
> solution for a library and I want the library (libcurl) to work as 
> documented without having to force the application to do various tricks. 
> sigaction() is not even present everywhere.

well, signal(SIGPIPE, SIG_IGN) should be enough for everyone :-)

generally, I think raising SIGPIPE with the default action to terminate 
the app was a terrible design decision, but a library like gnutls that 
simply takes a file descriptor should use the socket "as-is", and leave 
the rest to the client of the library.

cheers,
Rupert

--
Rupert Kittinger-Sereinig <address@hidden>
Krenngasse 32
A-8010 Graz
Austria