NO_USE_SIGACTION?

[Manoj Kasichainula <ma...@io.com>]

Where NO_USE_SIGACTION is defined, is it because those platforms don't
have sigaction(), or is it just unreliable? If the former, I can just
introduce another autoconf check and be done with it. If the latter, I
may just do it anyway, since I'm sure a big pile of problems go away
now that 2.0 doesn't do as much signal stuff.

I have this question about a few of the defines actually. My plan
right now is just do autoconf checks for the cases that I don't see a
reason not to. If there are OS-specfic quirks that autoconf doesn't
know about (I'm guessing quite a few), they'll be shaken out during
alpha and beta.

-- 
Manoj Kasichainula - manojk at io dot com - http://www.io.com/~manojk/