Defect Report concerning: IEEE Std. 1003.1c-1995, ISO/IEC 9945-1:1990 AMD 2 - Threads
Clause: 3.3.7.3
PASC Interpretation Ref: pasc-1003.1c-40
Topic: sigsuspend


This is an unapproved interpretation of PASC 1003.1c-1995, ISO/IEC 9945-1:1990 AMD 2 - Threads.

Use of the information contained in this unapproved document is at your own risk.

Last update: 30 March,1998


								1003.1c-95  #40

 _____________________________________________________________________________

	Interpretation Number:	XXXX
	Topic:               sigsuspend
	Relevant Sections:   3.3.7.3

Interpretation Request: (Defect Report)
-----------------------

	From: Andrew Josey (on behalf of the X/Open Base working group)

Interpretation Request for:
   IEEE Std 1003.1c-1995 as contained in:
   ISO/IEC 9945-1:1996(E), ANSI/IEEE Std. 1003.1, 1996 Edition.
   Subsection 3.3.7.3, Page 87, Line 1203.

Question:
Is the phrase "Since the sigsuspend() function suspends process execution
indefinitely," correct? It is clear from line 1190 that the function suspends
the calling "thread", but why would the "process" be suspended indefinitely?

Suggested Correction:
Change the phrase to "Since the sigsuspend() function suspends thread execution
indefinitely,".


Interpretation response
-----------------------
The standard is clear that sigsuspend shall suspend the calling
thread until the delivery of a signal.  The explanatory subclause in
the returns section is not a correct representation of what happens
and this is being referred to the sponsor for correction as an
editorial error. 


Rationale
-------------
In the the declaritive text of the description for sigsuspend(), the
wording is very clear that the function will suspend the thread.  The
Interpretations Committee is believes that this is exactly what was
intended by the working and balloting groups.  The subclause in the
returns section is clearly explanitory but does not match what the
declaritive text states and is incorrect.  During development of the
standard, there were several changes made that required changing
process to thread and this was one that was missed.  


Forwarded to Interpretations group: Dec 9 1996
Proposed resolution: 29 Jan 97
Finalised: Feb 14 1997