Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread David Kastrup
"R. Lahaye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > From http://www.gnu.org/manual -> glibc -> Signal Handling: > > -- > Termination Signals > > [...] > > int SIGTERM > The SIGTERM signal is a generic signal used to cause program > termination. Unlike SIGKILL,

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread R. Lahaye
John Levon writes: > On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 07:50:03PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote: > > > This is were we disagree. > > > > IMSNHO SIGTERM and SIGINT should behave exactly the same. > > Please provide a rationale >From http://www.gnu.org/manual -> glibc -> Signal Handling: -

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread John Levon
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 08:19:02PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Well, SIGINT is fundamentally a tty signal. You raise it by typing > the interrupt character to the console/tty on which you have started > LyX explicitly. This tty is not necessarily in any way related to the > XServer and/or scr

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | | > On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 07:50:03PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | > | > > This is were we disagree. | > > | > > IMSNHO SIGTERM and SIGINT should behave exactly the same. | > | > Please provide a rati

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread David Kastrup
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 07:50:03PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > > > This is were we disagree. > > > > IMSNHO SIGTERM and SIGINT should behave exactly the same. > > Please provide a rationale Well, SIGINT is fundamentally a tty signal. You raise

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread John Levon
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 07:50:03PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > This is were we disagree. > > IMSNHO SIGTERM and SIGINT should behave exactly the same. Please provide a rationale thanks john -- "Of all manifestations of power, restraint impresses the most." - Thucydides

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 06:47:13PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | | > Sure we should exit cleanly on SIGTERM or SIGINT, but there should | > _not_ be any user interaction. | | You confused me by confusing SIGTERM and SIGINT. We should not have user

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread John Levon
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 06:47:13PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Sure we should exit cleanly on SIGTERM or SIGINT, but there should > _not_ be any user interaction. You confused me by confusing SIGTERM and SIGINT. We should not have user interaction on SIGTERM, on SIGINT we should. > Ther

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 06:02:27PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >> (killall lyx... -> You have unsaved buffer, do you want to save >> them...) > | If you want to lose data exit uncleanly, then SIGKILL is the signal. | SIGTERM should clean up log fil

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread Stephan Witt
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 04:26:44PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >>>| LyX should quit cleanly in ctrl-c case. I have a patch for it. >>> >>>It cannot quit completely clean... unsaved buffers must be left >>>unsave

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread John Levon
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 06:02:27PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > (killall lyx... -> You have unsaved buffer, do you want to save > them...) If you want to lose data exit uncleanly, then SIGKILL is the signal. SIGTERM should clean up log files, temp files, and for GUI programs, should save

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 04:26:44PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >> | LyX should quit cleanly in ctrl-c case. I have a patch for it. >> >> It cannot quit completely clean... unsaved buffers must be left >> unsaved. fex. > | We bring up the dialog. T

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread John Levon
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 04:26:44PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | LyX should quit cleanly in ctrl-c case. I have a patch for it. > > It cannot quit completely clean... unsaved buffers must be left > unsaved. fex. We bring up the dialog. This is the right thing to do IMO. regards john -

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-22 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Fri, Jul 19, 2002 at 05:38:19PM +0900, R. Lahaye wrote: > >> a ctrl-C, it tries to make an emergency save, but does not >> remove the lyx_tmpdir. Shouldn't that be done? Especially >> for "safe" signals such as ctrl-C. > | LyX should quit cleanly in ctr

Re: LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-19 Thread Angus Leeming
On Friday 19 July 2002 9:38 am, R. Lahaye wrote: > BTW: where can I find the code that is responsible for > the signal catching? grep SIG src/*.C

LyX catches signals, but doesn't remove lyx_tmpdir.

2002-07-19 Thread R. Lahaye
Hi, LyX catches certain signals. When LyX gets, for example, a ctrl-C, it tries to make an emergency save, but does not remove the lyx_tmpdir. Shouldn't that be done? Especially for "safe" signals such as ctrl-C. Same for other signals that are caught, except may be for the more desastrous sign