Re: vfork() semantics changed: ERESTARTNOINTR

2010-12-03 Thread Roland McGrath
> I am not sure ERESTARTNOINTR leaks to user-space. Probably reporter > noticed ERESTARTNOINTR in strace.out and came to the wrong conclusion. > Afaics, make reports -EINVAL. But I don't think vfork is supposed to be able to fail with EINVAL. So something is fishy. -- devel mailing list devel@lis

Re: vfork() semantics changed: ERESTARTNOINTR

2010-12-02 Thread Roland McGrath
> On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 09:27:34AM -0800, John Reiser wrote: > > vfork() can fail with ERESTARTNOINTR which is 513 > > and somewhat young. 'make' did not know: > >https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659382 > > > > If your package has any shell-like feature > > then it might be good

Re: vfork() semantics changed: ERESTARTNOINTR

2010-12-02 Thread Kyle McMartin
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 09:27:34AM -0800, John Reiser wrote: > vfork() can fail with ERESTARTNOINTR which is 513 > and somewhat young. 'make' did not know: >https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659382 > > If your package has any shell-like feature > then it might be good to check for v

vfork() semantics changed: ERESTARTNOINTR

2010-12-02 Thread John Reiser
vfork() can fail with ERESTARTNOINTR which is 513 and somewhat young. 'make' did not know: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659382 If your package has any shell-like feature then it might be good to check for vfork(). -- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https:/