X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:54:57 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: fun? with libsigsegv
Message-ID: <20090724035457.GA10802@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <loom DOT 20090717T213846-627 AT post DOT gmane DOT org>  <loom DOT 20090717T224758-877 AT post DOT gmane DOT org>  <loom DOT 20090717T225214-564 AT post DOT gmane DOT org>  <20090718042002 DOT GA29467 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>  <20090718094540 DOT GA7707 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>  <4A61AF23 DOT 6020502 AT byu DOT net>  <20090718152511 DOT GC30721 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090718152511.GC30721@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 11:25:11AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 05:16:51AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
>>So I see several possibilities:
>>[snip]
>
>My point, which I don't think you addressed in your long explanation, is
>that there doesn't seem to be any "alternate stack" stuff going on in
>the Windows code.  Therefore, it seems like you could just rely on linux
>signal handling to get the same level of behavior under Cygwin that you
>currently get with the library.  The problem is that, although configure
>seems to be ok with a missing sigaltstack function, and some of the code
>tries to work around its lack, there are still lots of places which
>assume that if you're on UNIX you must have this function.
>
>libaltstack is doing something dangerous by assuming that it knows what
 libsigsegv
>Cygwin is doing with SEH.  I don't think that it should ever be used on
>Cygwin in its current incarnation.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple