[OpenAFS-devel] Re: pthreading the bosserver

[chas williams - CONTRACTOR]

On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:44:22 -0400 (EDT)
Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU> wrote:

> handling signals.  Unblocking a few signals around calls to spawnprocve() 
> is slightly racy, and we can do better -- 10126 is basically saying "the

I was hoping that http://gerrit.openafs.org/#change,8749 would
eventually be committed to the source tree so I could use it.

> Unix semantics are silly, unblock all signals in the child process and let 
> it set its own mask if it wants", and 8749 is giving the caller control 
> over the signal mask of the child process.
> 
> I think either one is workable, and it really boils down to a design 
> decision for the procmgmt library about what its interface should be. 
> (The original authors seem to have not considered this design decision.) 
> The code in  is more flexible, and  is closer to "create the 
> child in a pristene environment".

You probably shouldn't change the default behaviour of pre-existing
users of this routine.  It is difficult to predict what side effect
this might have since I don't know who is already using this library.
Lastly, I imagine there might be cases where one would like the signals
to propagate to children.