Subject: Re: struct emul modification
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/17/2001 20:22:29
In article <200105171948.f4HJm2h01031@saruman.ics.muni.cz>,
Jarommr Dolecek <email@example.com> wrote:
>Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>> I already asked here is nobody was against moving e_flags outside of the
>> __HAS_MINIMAL_EMUL ifdef in struct emul. I had no answer. Shall I assume
>> anyone is okay with this?
>Well, generally, other solution would be preferable. Wouldn't it
>be possible to add come completely compat/linux specific code
>to catch the signal and do not actually post it to Linux process
>if the descriptor is a pipe? I'd hate to add some stuff which
>would become obsolete the moment newpipe would go in.
Actually we would want to implement SIGIO for newpipe.