From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS22989 209.51.188.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B73881F5A0 for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2023 01:45:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=clisp.org header.i=@clisp.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=strato-dkim-0002 header.b=Trb0g90y; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pO7ca-00036w-R9; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 20:45:40 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pO7cX-00036k-RK for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 20:45:37 -0500 Received: from mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([81.169.146.216]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pO7cW-0005oY-3C for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2023 20:45:37 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1675475133; cv=none; d=strato.com; s=strato-dkim-0002; b=BVI1qfus4Zwh5pHyeWiHRR0m94+fCUB0aSmH6Rrn8Dld5x1a0YYJxOkhoUG69S0mkk kD0erk6h+ppaCl1o5ntKKdIpJIUi7K3MGpuTJhv2aWO2TZ/idXo1EtERMtapQbZ51Nqu r+cZUAZorM/VUUPIJj+G//ozvB7aOS6fp4o8p3kCPm5yDYhPv2M6uEvSnjmSKHd4X+Sk mjAtAtnfy2PA8lWMapsjo5FELalHMYXBcDZyKDZXDEYD2BSL17qMj26JhFLbi/UpMJyh 3fIF+VNBHnErLziloVEK+H8Kun724R+dBoUWNCYeYVDtZAT06RygF/vEoxvO8bmz9pwI BEqw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1675475133; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=strato.com; h=References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:To:From:Cc:Date:From: Subject:Sender; bh=4iX67Ja3Z2WtBt7fNjFaXlDu89v6NHuUYxlkliwiNvo=; b=UeFH8M/qUZFByQ+6PVaG2loSpQI16HpKvO4L+CMR26y5Ic+X3UUFnDAbHjjEwaGriv kQdBreNx+WzxSuGKhfSvUS4DaUJhRjIBXqaINZk7DAYB0yNHZP8HiAZzVlkyH1mS/oUe a2KZAtAEI4iQLkTTbgBJysurXjq4JROy1mdggQjnVV85QIssd/EDKCUsZW3SL1mlC1G3 i5QV/GPQddHSFPJD2fI5MmNNhecwf0Vih0eVNINfzW2efXxhGvUtew5+dha19VBnMFRH GGYKCkZrWLneVW4XuFB9VCyYG1ttiXEgWX+SJquS+1KPPf/96UjDOj/bKaxAdGxqgiVJ 59YQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; strato.com; arc=none; dkim=none X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1675475133; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=clisp.org; h=References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:To:From:Cc:Date:From: Subject:Sender; bh=4iX67Ja3Z2WtBt7fNjFaXlDu89v6NHuUYxlkliwiNvo=; b=Trb0g90yjd0rGkofoE+JfaI5NxJNoSoOm1Gj7d8Rp17lHPrmJTtwPXt1W66TpBk2YO 39BAdN3hGDr1q6HngnI3gA9HqWVPegeOknxPIIW5CA1QA9y6FAMwZNz67fG/sNmPCXhT QA6fUentVZ3RNrTIYgLR80v8t+NRfv+rm/98VXMZdT2BsQNMpFUb6Np8+S//nmVarcQc ZEJUS/n7auymytnk6g4hDdueQsn5nJNQcTdf+xUw5eyqckHfBUw8qBZTE9E69frjUzL6 8XJO1zTqlpkhCft1EsNMxLmBhbjUbHZWbRrnqxGZOY3JpkV2AQeg5MyzkM7vVz0dgxWU Josw== X-RZG-AUTH: ":Ln4Re0+Ic/6oZXR1YgKryK8brlshOcZlIWs+iCP5vnk6shH0WWb0LN8XZoH94zq68+3cfpPA2PGGju9CkgSBMSy6rHEf+c+mmA==" Received: from nimes.localnet by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 49.2.2 AUTH) with ESMTPSA id 098542z141jX0Om (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate); Sat, 4 Feb 2023 02:45:33 +0100 (CET) From: Bruno Haible To: bug-gnulib@gnu.org Subject: Re: doc: Update regarding NetBSD Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2023 02:45:33 +0100 Message-ID: <2793700.ym9AcoWpTW@nimes> In-Reply-To: <2207819.gQ4Ct1Qfld@nimes> References: <2207819.gQ4Ct1Qfld@nimes> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="nextPart2221040.5CbEuCUJ2i" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Received-SPF: none client-ip=81.169.146.216; envelope-from=bruno@clisp.org; helo=mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: bug-gnulib@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gnulib discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnulib-bounces+normalperson=yhbt.net@gnu.org Sender: bug-gnulib-bounces+normalperson=yhbt.net@gnu.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --nextPart2221040.5CbEuCUJ2i Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" And here's the second attachment. --nextPart2221040.5CbEuCUJ2i Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="netbsd-bug2.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; name="netbsd-bug2.txt" To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org Subject: sigprocmask return value wrong when libpthread is in use From: bruno@clisp.org Reply-To: bruno@clisp.org X-send-pr-version: 3.95 >Submitter-Id: net >Originator: >Organization: GNU >Confidential: no >Synopsis: The return value of sigprocmask is not standards compliant >Severity: non-critical >Priority: medium >Category: lib >Class: sw-bug >Release: NetBSD 9.0 >Environment: System: NetBSD netbsd9.bruno.haible.de 9.0 NetBSD 9.0 (GENERIC) #0: Fri Feb 14 00:06:28 UTC 2020 mkrepro@mkrepro.NetBSD.org:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC amd64 Architecture: x86_64 Machine: amd64 >Description: When a program that is linked with libpthread uses the sigprocmask function, its return value can be wrong. See https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/pthread_sigmask.html section "RETURN VALUE". >How-To-Repeat: Compile this program ==================== foo.c ================ #include #include #include int main () { sigset_t set; int ret; sigemptyset (&set); sigaddset (&set, SIGINT); ret = sigprocmask (1729, &set, NULL); if (ret == 0) printf ("sigprocmask succeeded!\n"); else printf ("sigprocmask -> %d, errno=%d\n", ret, errno); ret = pthread_sigmask (1729, &set, NULL); if (ret == 0) printf ("pthread_sigmask succeeded!\n"); else printf ("pthread_sigmask -> %d\n", ret); return 0; } ============================================= $ gcc -Wall foo.c -lpthread $ ./a.out Expected output: sigprocmask -> -1, errno=22 pthread_sigmask -> 22 Actual output: sigprocmask -> 22, errno=22 pthread_sigmask -> 22 >Fix: --nextPart2221040.5CbEuCUJ2i--