in reply to Re^6: SIGHUP delivered on Windows
in thread SIGHUP delivered on Windows

could it be that an exception occuring within this signal handler (or a second signal arriving by that time) could be translated somehow into a SIGHUP?

I cannot see how that could happen.

Firstly, for you to get to the line where you do kill SIGHUP, $$, your process would have to have already received a SIGHUP; because you're just rethrowing it. But I am unaware of anything that would ever send you a SIGHUP.

There is the vague possibility that another Perl process could be sending your process a SIGHUP; but as far as I'm aware, any attempt to do so would simply get translated into a SIGTERM.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
network sites:

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: SIGHUP delivered on Windows
by rovf (Priest) on May 24, 2013 at 11:33 UTC
    I agree with your reasoning. That's what I thought too.

    So for the time being, this has to remain a mystery. Thanks for taking the time to analyze my code.

    Ronald Fischer <>
      If you were running Cygwin Perl all your fav unix signals would work. But you claim to run ActivePerl so IDK what to say further.

        How true ..... :-(

        Ronald Fischer <>