Re: is KERNEL developement finished, yet ???

[Mikael Pettersson]

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