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 has been replaced by a new set of signal handlers.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???)