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
Message-ID: <00c101c0d9a6$44a44a30$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc: <fred AT ontosys DOT com>
References: <E94FF01DFF6CD31186F4080009DC361502086B8D AT nttwr2 DOT tower DOT bldgs DOT butlermfg DOT org> <20010510112639 DOT A26981 AT enteract DOT com> <20010510123102 DOT B15024 AT redhat DOT com> <20010510123628 DOT A48047 AT enteract DOT com> <20010510140721 DOT F12136 AT redhat DOT com>
Subject: Re: SIGTERM does not stop backend postgres processes immediately
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:09:28 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 May 2001 23:03:23.0100 (UTC) FILETIME=[699B71C0:01C0D9A5]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Cc: <fred AT ontosys DOT com>
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 4:07 AM
Subject: Re: SIGTERM does not stop backend postgres processes
immediately


>
> I'll bet the the Open Group would imply that a signal does not close
> a socket if you are blocked in a recv() call, too.
>
> I don't know why you are getting the impression that I'm passing down
> an edict.  I'm always open to methods for getting Cygwin to work
> more like UNIX.  I don't see how closing the socket can achieve this
> goal, even if you could make it work.


Blueskying a concept here: what about cygwin opening all sockets in
non-blocking mode, and if the app thinks that it is a blocking call wait
on the socket && on a signal event?

Obviously not trivial to get working right, but
a) would it work on 95?
b) thoughts?

Rob



> cgf
>
> --
> Want to unsubscribe from this list?
> Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
>
>


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple