X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
Date: 24 Dec 2003 08:07:43 +0200
Message-Id: <u65g63g0g.fsf@elta.co.il>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: "Gisle Vanem" <giva AT bgnett DOT no>
CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <23f801c3c9b6$8c34b080$0600000a@broadpark.no> (giva@bgnett.no)
Subject: Re: pending SIGALRM
References: <207a01c3c8c6$26445c80$0600000a AT broadpark DOT no> <uisk7irn3 DOT fsf AT elta DOT co DOT il> <22ca01c3c974$aa833260$0600000a AT broadpark DOT no> <9003-Tue23Dec2003215638+0200-eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il> <23f801c3c9b6$8c34b080$0600000a AT broadpark DOT no>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: "Gisle Vanem" <giva AT bgnett DOT no>
> Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 01:40:36 +0100
> 
> What I mean was "sigprocmask() calls the alarm() handler ...".

Ah, okay, I missed that.

> PS. I tried the sigprocmask() approach and it's more compact. But since
> I've no place to longjmp() from, that means I must sprinkle all my loops 
> with tests for pending signals.

That's true, but isn't that better than having to longjmp?

If you use `select', perhaps we could modify it to do the checking
for you.  Or you could provide your own replacement for `select' that
does this.