On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Henning Meier-Geinitz wrote: >Maybe something is wrong with pthread_cancel()? > >Ok, the reason seems to be the blocking of all signals but sigterm in >test.c. It works, if I don't do this. Maybe pthread_cancel() uses one >of those signals? > >I guess we don't need to block the signals for the test backend. But >at least for mustek, I need the signal blocking and the signal >handler, otherwise the scanner may be left in a confused state if the >scan is cancelled. Maybe I'll just block all siganls while >reading/writing and enable all after that again. And the signal >handler is called for all signals. > >Do you know which signal is used by pthread_cancel()?
"006 Topic: Conflicts between ISO/IEC 9945 (POSIX) and the Linux 007 Standard Base. " http://www.opengroup.org/personal/ajosey/tr28-07-2003.txt "225 Threaded applications cannot use SIGUSR1 or SIGUSR2." So I'd assume it is one of those. -- Erik I. Bolsø | email: <knan at mo.himolde.no> The UNIX philosophy basically involves giving you enough rope to hang yourself. And then a couple of feet more, just to be sure.
