[Toybox] default SIGPIPE handler that calls _exit(0)?

[Rich Felker]

On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 12:04:31PM -0700, enh wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Rob Landley <rob at landley.net> wrote:
> > On 04/27/2015 11:26 AM, enh wrote:
> >>>> it would also result in things like top(1) not exiting.
> >>>
> >>> If top is using stdio, it's easy to add a single ferror(stdout) check
> >>> to the main loop. If it's using write(), it _must_ be checking for
> >>> errors anyway since write can always return with a short/partial
> >>> write. But top is unlikely to be hooked up to a pipe or socket anyway;
> >>> it normally needs a terminal.
> >>
> >> the point is that then people need to think. if that were a plausible
> >> solution, this thread wouldn't exist. the advantage of the signal
> >> handler is that humans can keep on being humans.
> >
> > I _so_ should have called this project Dorodango. (See
> > http://www.dorodango.com.)
> >
> > The point of this project is to do things right. I want to _fix_
> > everything I can. My insane cleanup review passes involve trying to find
> > all this stuff and make sure we get it right.
> >
> > Sure, outside toybox yay sigpipe. But inside, the question is what the
> > correct behavior should be.
> >
> > It sounds like android wants _exit(0)
> 
> no, not particularly. we're arguing internally about whether SIGPIPE
> is a crash or not. i think even undoing the dynamic linker's
> installation of a crash reporter by setting it back to SIG_DFL would
> be fine for toybox --- the real problem is that the dynamic linker
> doesn't know whether it's dealing with an Android app (where you
> probably do want the crash reporting) or a command-line tool (where
> you probably don't), let alone corner cases like a command-line tool
> that's implemented in Java.

In that case the crash-reporting signal handler setup should be in the
Android app init code, not the dynamic linker, no?

Rich

 1430598733.0