Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.bugs Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!convex!convex!cs.utexas.edu!wupost!newsfeed.rice.edu!rice!news.Rice.edu!rich From: rich@Rice.edu (Richard Murphey) Subject: Re: cvs 1.3 bugfix In-Reply-To: bde@runx.oz.au's message of 5 Mar 93 06:26:11 GMT Message-ID: <RICH.93Mar5215806@omicron.Rice.edu> Sender: news@rice.edu (News) Reply-To: Rich-Murphey@Rice.edu Organization: Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Rice University References: <RICH.93Mar3114046@omicron.Rice.edu> <SOMMERFELD.93Mar3180839@blatt.apollo.hp.com> <1993Mar5.062611.26942@runx.oz.au> Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 03:58:06 GMT Lines: 18 In article <1993Mar5.062611.26942@runx.oz.au> bde@runx.oz.au (Bruce Evans) writes: In article <SOMMERFELD.93Mar3180839@blatt.apollo.hp.com> sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com (Bill Sommerfeld) writes: >I think this is a bug in the sigismember macro, not in cvs.... sigismember(), sigaddset() and sigdelset() all fail to check their signal number arg. The bug was recently fixed for linux by not defining the bad macros, but the 386BSD library doesn't have functions behind the macros (probably another bug) so this doesn't work. -- Bruce Evans bde%runx.oz.au@ips.oz.au OK, I'm hearing conflicting interpretations of 3.3.3.3 and 3.3.3.4 in POSIX 1003.1. The standard states that *if* an error is detected errno will be set. It does not say that invalid arguments must be detected. I'm not at all sure who's right. Rich