Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:27:41 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: [long] Re: signals?
Message-ID: <20001212002741.D22048@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <4 DOT 3 DOT 2 DOT 7 DOT 0 DOT 20001113000139 DOT 00c3ba60 AT pop DOT bresnanlink DOT net> <4 DOT 3 DOT 2 DOT 7 DOT 0 DOT 20001001212519 DOT 00c09bb0 AT pop> <4 DOT 3 DOT 2 DOT 7 DOT 0 DOT 20001001212519 DOT 00c09bb0 AT pop> <20001002114023 DOT H13304 AT cygnus DOT com> <4 DOT 3 DOT 2 DOT 7 DOT 0 DOT 20001113000139 DOT 00c3ba60 AT pop DOT bresnanlink DOT net> <20001113115655 DOT J7424 AT redhat DOT com> <5 DOT 0 DOT 0 DOT 25 DOT 0 DOT 20001211202412 DOT 02930eb0 AT pop DOT bresnanlink DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.0.20001211202412.02930eb0@pop.bresnanlink.net>; from cabbey@bresnanlink.net on Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 11:21:05PM -0600

On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 11:21:05PM -0600, Chris Abbey wrote:
>ok, here I go again dredging up an OLD thread...  but I still can't
>figure this out.  We know from previous discussion in the thread that
>SIGINT is in fact what is being thrown at the process when I hit
>ctrl-break, and that the people who retained the unix "SIGQUIT" naming
>in the source code deserve to be flogged with a wet noodle.  However, I
>still feel the shell (bash) is not treating my process fairly, as it is
>not allowing it to complete the handler, but rather is killing it off
>immediately.  For java developers this renders cygwin a useless
>environment, because we can't debug our processes.
>
>At 11:56 11/13/00 -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>Dunno.  Probably, you're sending more than one CTRL-BREAK.  It works
>>fine for me.
>>
>>cgf
>
>ok, I'd ask that you (and anyone else with a couple minutes) humor me

If the "you" here is me, then I respectfully decline.

I really am not very interested in understanding what is or isn't going
wrong here.  Sorry.

If you do find anything related to the way cygwin code operates, however,
feel free to post it here and I'll review it.

And, please, if anyone else is interested in experimenting, feel free.
I just thought I would respond in case you were waiting for me to
do something.

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com