On Mon 11 Apr 2011 19:36, Mark H Weaver <m...@netris.org> writes: > Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> wrote: >> I pushed a (sigaction SIGPIPE SIG_IGN) to (system repl repl), which >> should fix the issue. > > Isn't this a bad idea? SIGPIPE generally indicates that something went > wrong. If we ignore it, important problems may go unnoticed. To me, > this seems kind of like ignoring SIGSEGV to get around a memory access > to an unmapped area that would be inconvenient to prevent. > > Furthermore, what happens if a REPL is started within a Guile process > that wants to install its own handler for SIGPIPE? > > Why is a pipe being created here, anyway? Why not just a socket?
Sorry, this isn't in (system repl repl), it's in (system repl server) -- so it's a socket. If the socket is closed without cleanup, you might get a SIGPIPE. It's necessary in net-facing servers. You don't get this behavior if you don't --listen. Regards, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/
