forwarded message from Henry Cejtin

[Stephen Weeks]

Received: from maguro.epr.com ([198.3.162.27]) by exchange.epr.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21)
	id PR8RTFH6; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:47:13 -0700
Received: from magrathea.epr.com (firewall-user@magrathea.epr.com [198.3.160.1])
	by maguro.epr.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA05330
	for <sweeks@intertrust.com>; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:49:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by magrathea.epr.com (8.9.3/8.7.3) id KAA13101 for <sweeks@intertrust.com>; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:49:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nodnsquery(199.249.165.245) by magrathea.epr.com via smap (V5.5)
	id xma012793; Thu, 27 Jul 00 10:48:43 -0700
Received: (from henry@localhost)
	by syzygy.clairv.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA32557
	for sweeks@intertrust.com; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:48:42 -0500
Message-Id: <200007271748.MAA32557@syzygy.clairv.com>
From: Henry Cejtin <henry@sourcelight.com>
To: sweeks@intertrust.com
Subject: Re: alternate stacks for signal handlers
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:48:42 -0500

Yes, I think that that (having the ML code manually doing the restart after
the interrupt, is the way to go.  I'm slightly nervous about the EINTR thing
since I seem to recall some versions of Unix returning other things.  For
instance ERESTART.