[9fans] name resolution

[Richard Uhtenwoldt <ru@river.org>]

>Nah, if the program isn't event driven, a signal still ought to be able
>to interrupt the syscall.  Lynx probably just doesn't bother.

that's right: during a name resolution in Lynx, sig intr (^c) and sig
susp (^z) have their usual effect: namely, sig intr kills the Lynx.

because the ftp command does so, it is almost certain that Lynx
_could_ have a handler (terminology?) that customizes the behavior of
sig intr.  in particular, if ftp is blocked on a name lookup, sig intr
gets you right back to the command prompt.

but like you say they did not bother.


>Plan 9 has a much better bug: if a fileserver doesn't answer 9p messages,
>a communicating process blocked in read/write never gets unblocked and
>can't be killed with a signal.  Sigh.

I'm curious whether _that_ is because no one has bothered (to fix it)
or because previous design and implementation decisions make fixing
it really awkward.

if a fileserver doesn't answer 9p messages,
can a signal (note) kill the _parent_ of the blocked process?

can the parent be made to handle a signal by killing the child?
(I hope that's clear!)