Re: Mutt && handling of SIGCHLD while starting $sendmail

[Kevin J. McCarthy]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 02:34:57PM -0600, Derek Martin wrote:

Then finally, from this:

10502 alarm(0)                          = 0
10502 rt_sigaction(SIGALRM, {sa_handler=0xd76dd3, sa_mask=[], 
sa_flags=SA_RESTORER|0x200, sa_restorer=0x7f9762c035a0}, NULL, 8) = 0
10502 kill(10499, SIG_0)                = 0
10502 exit_group(127)                   = ?

I conclude that your process chain is exiting only due to a signal
(SIGALRM), which most likely indicates a bug on your end.  That
seems to be triggering the bug with Mutt's incomplete child management
code.  We have no insight into what your code is doing.

Hi Derek,







--
Kevin J. McCarthy
GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C  5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA

Thanks for your input and multiple followups. I haven't gone through all the messages yet, but just wanted to comment here. I think this code is from Mutt itself, (in master) line 2589. Mutt always calls alarm(0) and sigaction() afterwards, regardless of whether SendmailWait is set. I don't believe the process itself had a SIGALRM or that Matthias had SendmailWait set.

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature