Re: doc signal handler return type

[Akim Demaille]

 > Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:
 >> 
 >> There must be some confusion here, as POSIX.1 clearly requires "void".

 > New proposed words below, being suitably non-committal.

 > This is still only on the principle that if something is worth having
 > an autoconf test for (ie. AC_TYPE_SIGNAL) then it's worth a note about
 > portability.


 > `signal' handler
 >      Normally `signal' takes a handler function with a return type of
 >      `void', but some old systems required `int' instead.  Any actual
 >      `int' value returned is not used, this is only a difference in the
 >      function prototype demanded.

 >      All systems we know of in current use take `void'.  Presumably
 >      `int' was to support K&R C, where of course `void' is not
 >      available.  `AC_TYPE_SIGNAL' (*note Particular Types::) can be
 >      used to establish the correct type in all cases.



Fine with me.  Please, install ASAP so that we can proceed onto the release.