From xemacs-m  Sun Dec 29 11:28:55 1996
Received: from venus.Sun.COM (venus.Sun.COM [192.9.25.5])
          by xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id LAA10894 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sun, 29 Dec 1996 11:28:55 -0600 (CST)
Received: from Eng.Sun.COM ([129.146.1.25]) by venus.Sun.COM (SMI-8.6/mail.byaddr) with SMTP id JAA28491; Sun, 29 Dec 1996 09:28:27 -0800
Received: from kindra.eng.sun.com by Eng.Sun.COM (SMI-8.6/SMI-5.3)
	id JAA27307; Sun, 29 Dec 1996 09:28:24 -0800
Received: from xemacs.eng.sun.com by kindra.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id JAA02671; Sun, 29 Dec 1996 09:28:24 -0800
Received: by xemacs.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id JAA06330; Sun, 29 Dec 1996 09:28:23 -0800
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 09:28:23 -0800
Message-Id: <199612291728.JAA06330@xemacs.eng.sun.com>
From: Martin Buchholz <mrb@Eng.Sun.COM>
To: Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com>
Cc: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: xemacs-19.15b4/b4 report for NEXTSTEP
In-Reply-To: <m24th6wb61.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
References: <199612281122.MAA18514@sol1.cybernet-ag.net>
	<m2681mbhif.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
	<199612282012.MAA05102@xemacs.eng.sun.com>
	<m24th6wb61.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
Reply-To: Martin Buchholz <mrb@Eng.Sun.COM>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.97)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

>>>>> "sb" == Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com> writes:

Martin> OK, I vaguely remember doing that now, as part of my quest for
Martin> warning-free compiles.  It's a non-functional change, and can
Martin> be undone if we want to.

sb> Thu Dec 19 00:44:10 1996  Bart Robinson  <lomew@cs.utah.edu>

sb>         * syssignal.h: The declaration of SIGTYPE shouldn't be protected
sb>         by HAVE_SIGPROCMASK.

Hmmmm.  That would be why my recollection was vague...

sb> This looks more correct.  Or rather, that #define looks pretty bogus.
sb> We might have inherited that code from Emacs, but it's not there in
sb> 19.34.

Martin> Axel, perhaps you want to take another look at the header
Martin> files.  Type correctness is worth it in the long run.  If you
Martin> really need to have this change undone, we'll make it so.

sb> If you keep the #define signal_handler_t, you will need:

sb> #ifndef signal_handler_t
sb> typedef SIGTYPE (*signal_handler_t) (int);
sb> #endif

sb> Or try wiping out the #define altogether in next.h.  That's the
sb> preferred solution.

The fact that this #define is repeated in m/next.h and s/nextstep.h is a
sure sign of bogosity.

Martin

