Weird signal handling bug 221635

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 04:35:05PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 11:15 +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > While I've weakened the assertion upstream for other reasons (i.e. the
> > assert function isn't async-signal-safe, though that wouldn't cause this
> > bug), and may well propose this for 8.04.1, it worries me that a signal
> > handler is being called with a signal number that wasn't requested by
> > sigaction; the consequences might be more serious elsewhere. Can anyone
> > see anything wrong with my code, or think of a kernel bug that might
> > cause this?
> > 
> What _was_ the signum it was being called with?

Unknown; the assert() call didn't show it, of course, and no strace was
available when I looked.

-- 
 - mdz