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.