Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:10478 comp.lang.c:14514 Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!mit-eddie!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!elroy!peregrine!ccicpg!felix!arcturus!evil From: evil@arcturus.UUCP (Wade Guthrie) Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.lang.c Subject: Re: System 5.3.1 signal() replacement? Summary: Am I crazy, or is signal() system dependent (or both) Message-ID: <2914@arcturus> Date: 2 Dec 88 17:09:22 GMT References: <7997@dasys1.UUCP> Organization: Rockwell International, Anaheim, CA Lines: 23 In article <7997@dasys1.UUCP>, treed@dasys1.UUCP (Timothy Reed) writes: > I don't have access to a 5.3.1 system, but I understand that signal() > has been replaced by a new set of signal handlers. Could someone kindly While we're talking about signal(), I got the impression that the behavior of signal handling functions was operating system dependent (e.g. AT&T UNIX causes the programmer installed signal handler to be replaced by the system routine when the signal in question occurs, but BSD UNIX does not replace the programmer's routine). I noticed in an article about the dpANS (am I correct in assuming that this means something like the draft of the proposed ANSI standard?) the signal function -- how is the behavior of this specified, is it specified in a portable fashion or do they leave it up to the operating system? Enquiring minds want to know Wade Guthrie Rockwell International Anaheim, CA (Rockwell doesn't necessarily believe / stand by what I'm saying; how could they when *I* don't even know what I'm talking about???)