Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 14:36:29 +0200 (IST) From: Eli Zaretskii To: "Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer" cc: dj AT delorie DOT com, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: Request for comments: SIGQUIT in DJGPP v2.02 In-Reply-To: <199801261913.UAA27415@wildsau.idv.uni-linz.ac.at> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Precedence: bulk On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer wrote: > Please excuse me, but the current *design* is definitly "rash". You will need to explain what aspects of the design deserve this label. Otherwise, I won't know what and how to improve. As I already said, moving SIGQUIT support into termios is IMHO a bad idea, since signal support has very little to do with termios, and programs which need signals should not need to link in termios which affects terminal I/O in fundamental ways. > I have been asking to find out your motivation for the patch. The > first time you responded it was emacs and some interpreter, now you > respond it's not emacs. My changes include two main features: (1) the ability to define a key other than Ctrl-C that generates SIGINT, and (2) the generation of SIGQUIT (whose key can also be user-defined). Emacs was the main motivation for the first of these. > - which programs need it ? > - what exactly are they needing it for ? I already answered that: SIGQUIT is required when you need to have two different actions triggered by a keypress. But I don't see why should we at all discuss programs which need this. I didn't invent SIGQUIT itself, it exists both in v2.01 and on other platforms to which we want to be compatible. So if the SIGQUIT feature in its default configuration is harmless (as it is now, since SIGQUIT is ignored by default), then I really see no reasons to argue about its inclusion on the basis of its potential users. For example, the only user of termios (that I know of) is Bash; does that mean that we don't need termios? > - why do you it is neccessary to do B) instead of A) ? A) is to not change anything. I'm not willing to flush down the drain the many hours of work I spent making this happen (including all the changes that several people requested to make it more transparent) which result in code that works and is clean enough to satisfy me. Frankly, I'm surprised you even ask me to consider that possibility. In summary, I think SIGQUIT support is both important enough and harmless enough to be included. If you have specific comments on the design, I would be glad to hear them.