PERFORCE change 111194 for review

[Alexander Leidinger]

Quoting Divacky Roman <xdivac02 at stud.fit.vutbr.cz> (from Thu, 7 Dec  
2006 18:49:57 +0100):

> On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 12:01:27PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>> Quoting Divacky Roman <xdivac02 at stud.fit.vutbr.cz> (from Thu, 7 Dec
>> 2006 11:37:55 +0100):
>>
>> >On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 08:08:29AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>> >>Quoting Roman Divacky <rdivacky at FreeBSD.org> (from Wed, 6 Dec 2006
>> >>13:23:42 GMT):
>> >>
>> >>>http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=111194
>> >>>
>> >>>Change 111194 by rdivacky at rdivacky_witten on 2006/12/06 13:23:04
>> >>>
>> >>>	Add an XXX comment about signal delivery in linux_exit_group.
>> >>>	We currently ignore sending a signal if SIGNAL_EXIT_GROUP is set
>> >>>	condition. We dont even implement this flag....
>> >>
>> >>What about a printf in case the flag is set? This way we should notice
>> >>if it is used somewhere. We could also correlate this with application
>> >>misbehavior.
>> >
>> >we dont even implement the functionality of the flag.
>>
>> Yes, and to get a glue how important it is, we should print a message.
>
> you dont understand.. the flag is not passed in or something. its an
> internal thing. kernel sets that under some conditions...

I thought this is passed in somewhere... are you sure? This is not  
related to the failure in the abort01/kill11 test?

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
Hlade's Law:
	If you have a difficult task, give it to a lazy person --
	they will find an easier way to do it.

http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137