Re: is KERNEL developement finished, yet ???

From: Mikael Pettersson (mikpe@csd.uu.se)
Date: Thu Dec 05 2002 - 09:33:12 EST


Shane Helms writes:
> But, if you're implying that we can start once again from bottom, and come up
> with something better that unix (which has been opensource, around for long
> while, tested and developed by many as well) I _HIGHLY_ doubt, and disagree.
>...
> I doubt there be any such errors (mistakes) if ANY. but then, i'm not a kernel
> developer, and new to this whole mailing list !!

Signal delivery on the current stack as opposed to a process-global
or per-signal sigaltstack is broken as hell. It messes up user-space
code that uses customised stack management methods.

sigaction() with SA_ONSTACK is unreliable because in reality applications
have linked-in libraries, and those libraries have no standard way of
knowing whether the main application wants SA_ONSTACK or not.

LD_PRELOAD:ing your own sigaction() is also unreliable, because C libs
tend to have internal calls that bypass the external name and go directly
to the internal __libc_sigaction() or whatever it happens to be called.

/Mikael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 07 2002 - 22:00:22 EST