Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hyperreal.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA11957; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 18:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (twinlark.arctic.org [204.62.130.91]) by hyperreal.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA11943 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 18:20:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 7192 invoked by uid 500); 4 Aug 1997 01:15:16 -0000 Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 18:15:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Dean Gaudet To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: someone please explain ap_signal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org Well, you could change it so that we use ap_signal everywhere and don't play with signal(). Dean On Sun, 3 Aug 1997, Marc Slemko wrote: > Gak. Ok. I understand, although I don't think I want to. Perhaps a > comment should be added. > > Ok, so tell me what we do about PR#905, ie. compiling htdigest. > > The problem is: > > - htdigest includes ../src/md5c.c > - md5c.c includes conf.h > - conf.h redefines signal to ap_signal > - the signal from http_main.c isn't included, so it don't work > > We don't need our new signal in htdigest, so I am not inclined to change > things so it is linked in there. > > An OS may define signal to the_real_signal_that_works, so we can't just > #undef signal after including md5c.c. > > On Sun, 3 Aug 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote: > > > > > > > On Sun, 3 Aug 1997, Marc Slemko wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 Roy wrote: > > > > > > >>This patch can't be right -- all it does is redefine signal to > > > >>a function that doesn't exist. Either you forgot something, > > > >>or your system's on drugs. > > > > > > > >Never mind -- Dean explained it to me. I didn't know that you could > > > >redefine both declarations and uses with #define. > > > > > > #define signal(s,f) ap_signal(s,f) > > > Sigfunc *signal(int signo, Sigfunc *func); > > > #endif > > > > > > What does this do? How? Why? Huh? > > > > It replaces all occurances of signal with ap_signal, including the > > definition of signal in http_main.c. It is confusing, yes. The > > alternative is to explicitly use ap_signal everywhere, and assume module > > writers haven't messed up... but, then, modules shouldn't be dinking with > > signals anyhow. > > > > Dean > > > > > >