Sender: rich AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <3913041A.43FB8303@bigfoot.com>
Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 18:25:46 +0100
From: Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: SIGIOT for DJGPP?
References: <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 10 DOT 10005051136460 DOT 597-100000 AT acp3bf> <3912DC6B DOT 89948250 AT softhome DOT net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
> 
> Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
> > We shouldn't try to make DJGPP a combination of all possible Unix
> > flavours that ever existed, so we don't need SIGIOT, I think.
> 
> I see your point, but if it is pretty easy to accomplich and does not
> cause any problems, then why not?

I guess it could break things that use the existance of SIGIOT as evidence
of its support. If they're going to fix gcc, why add it?