in reply to Re: Signal handling with (implicit) fork
in thread Signal handling with (implicit) fork

This is the kind of hand-slapping I was actually looking for - I somehow sensed that it was a bad application of Laziness. But there still remain some meat IMHO: if I were to call a "simpler" program, would this be the correct way to pre-mask a signal from Perl, or do exist more robust methods?

Thank you for the precious pointers and the OT effort :)

Flavio
perl -ple'$_=reverse' <<<ti.xittelop@oivalf

Don't fool yourself.
  • Comment on Re^2: Signal handling with (implicit) fork