Re: [xml] SIGFPE + small bug

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 04:38:22PM +0200, robert wrote:
>  >> Apparently, HAVE_SIGNAL is not defined anywhere so the signal isn't
>  >> blocked; this is on FreeBSD (both 4.2 and 3.3).
>  >  Ah ... and how does one trap a signal on FreeBSD ?
>
> That not the problem: FreeBSD traps signals the same way pretty much all
> Unices do, using signal(), but the signal-handler doesn't get set because
> HAVE_SIGNAL is not defined anywhere. Where (or by what) should it be
> defined?
>
> I just noticed another problem: the code in xmlXPathDivideBy() also checks
> for SIGFPE and SIG_IGN definitions, but since HAVE_SIGNAL_H is never
> defined anywhere, signal.h is not included and SIGFPE/SIG_IGN don't get
> defined as well.
>
> Perhaps a check for signal.h should be included?

  I'm really surprized, I was sure that the availability of signal() and
signal.h were checked from configure, and they were not there. 
  I added them to configure.in and commited. This probably explains
some of the other portability issues that were raised recently about
xpath.c <grin/>

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network http://redhat.com/products/network/
veillard redhat com  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/