Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!mcvax!ukc!cheviot!amh From: amh@cheviot.newcastle.ac.uk (Andrew Hilborne) Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards Subject: Re: signals like interrupts? Message-ID: <2267@cheviot.newcastle.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 22-Jul-87 06:35:06 EDT Article-I.D.: cheviot.2267 Posted: Wed Jul 22 06:35:06 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 25-Jul-87 04:19:21 EDT References: <17691@cmcl2.NYU.EDU> <3254@ncoast.UUCP> <17925@cmcl2.NYU.EDU> Reply-To: andrew@mari (Andrew Hilborne) Organization: MARI Ltd, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4 8RY, UK Lines: 13 Keywords: unix signal Summary: SIGQUIT *is* supposed to be "non-catchable" > In article <3254@ncoast.UUCP> allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon Allbery) writes: > > I often send SIGBUS to a process which traps SIGQUIT and then goes into > an infinite loop. I want the core dump, else I would use SIGKILL. Remember: > _no_ program is ever totally bug-free! > > Perhaps what is needed is a non-catchable terminate-with-coredump signal. > Programs should not normally trap SIGQUIT - this was originally designed to do just what you want. Unfortunately a bug in one version of UN*X meant that a SETUID program owned by root could core-dump a file owned by root and writeable to another. This was a security flaw and programs took to trapping SIGQUIT as well.