Use of the information contained in this unapproved document is at your own risk
.Last update: 20 April,2001
1003.2-92 #10
Class: No change
This response will be incorporated in an IEEE interpretations
publication, and will be also made available on-line on the IEEE
SPAsystem.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Interpretation Number: (to be assigned by the IEEE)
Topic: mailx
Relevant Sections: 4.40.5.4
Interpretation Request: (Defect Report)
-----------------------
In Section 4.40.5.4 - Asynchronous Events {of mailx}, the
standard states that, except for the SIGINT signal, ``the
mailx utility shall take the standard action for all other
signals; see 2.11.5.4'' [Draft 12 of IEEE Std 1003.2-1992
(July 1992), p. 359, line 6307]
Does the standard really mean that mailx cannot clean up or
otherwise handle a SIGQUIT signal?
According to Section 1.1 - Scope:
The facilities provided are based on historical
models of the following documents: the System V
Interface Definition {B35}; the BSD User Manual
{B41}; the x/OPEN Portability Guide {B44}; and
documentation for the KornShell {B36}. Emphasis
is placed on standardizing existing practice for
existing users, with changes or additions limited
to correcting deficiencies in the following areas:
(a) Support for international character sets
and other localization requirements,
such as date formats, collation
sequences, etc..
(b) Reconciliation of differences between
the historical implementations.
(c) Elimination of system or device
dependencies.
(d) Corrections of features that could
reduce system or user
security/integrity.
[Ibid., p. 2, lines 35-47]
It is our belief that any production-level interactive
command should ignore a SIGQUIT signal. Is the omission of
SIGQUIT from the list in Section 4.40.5.4 simply an
oversight?
IEEE Interpretation for 1003.2-1992
-----------------------------------
As stated in IEEE Std 1003.2-1992 Section 2.11.5.4, option 3
permits the result of the execution of the utility to be as
if default actions had been taken. This should not prevent
the implementation from performing cleanup operations.
Rationale for Interpretation:
-----------------------------
None.
_____________________________________________________________________________