Re: Documenting sigaltstack SS_AUTODISRM

[Stas Sergeev]

24.05.2017 14:09, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) ÐÐÑÐÑ:
> One could do this I suppose, but I read POSIX differently from
> you and, more importantly, SS_ONSTACK breaks portability on
> numerous other systems and is a no-op on Linux. So, the Linux man
> page really should warn against its use in the strongest terms.
So how about instead of the strongest terms towards
the code's author, just explain that SS_ONSTACK is a
bit-value on some/many OSes, and as such, 0 is a
valid value to enable sas on them, plus all the other
values would give EINVAL?
No strongest terms will help w/o an explanation,
because people will keep looking for something that
suits as a missing SS_ENABLE.