Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Anyone ever heard of a SIGPIPE with no obvious reason? I have a program, which crashed with a SIGPIPE. I prevented the crash with signal(SIGPIPE, SIG_IGN); Out of curiosity I did nothing else, i.e. no error handling. To my surprise the code works fine. I communicate with another program via one socket. And the data transfer through the socket works perfectly even after the SIGPIPE. Is this possible? SIGPIPE due to a temporary network hickup?
That’s how sockets work on *nixes.
Basically what happened is that you did a write()/send() or similar on a TCP socket that was reset by the peer. This will by default result in a SIGPIPE signal that terminates the application.
The common way to cope with this is to simply ignore the SIGPIPE signal as you’ve already done, and instead handle the error return value from write()/send().
More info can be found here, see chapter 2.19 and 2.22