From a345c63a597f5db618bf79c23ca4e6277eeab33e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: FRIGN <dev@frign.de>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 17:24:39 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Refactor sighandler

You can't handle SIGKILL. Given we have control over which
signals are passed to the sighandler, it's enough to catch SIGCHLD
and do standard behaviour than building a big switch for that.
---
 quark.c | 15 +++------------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/quark.c b/quark.c
index d819e8d..72b135b 100644
--- a/quark.c
+++ b/quark.c
@@ -459,20 +459,12 @@ serve(int fd) {
 
 void
 sighandler(int sig) {
-	switch(sig) {
-	default: break;
-	case SIGHUP:
-	case SIGINT:
-	case SIGQUIT:
-	case SIGABRT:
-	case SIGTERM:
+	if (sig == SIGCHLD) {
+		while(0 < waitpid(-1, NULL, WNOHANG));
+	} else {
 		logerrmsg("received signal: %s, closing down\n", strsignal(sig));
 		close(fd);
 		running = 0;
-		break;
-	case SIGCHLD:
-		while(0 < waitpid(-1, NULL, WNOHANG));
-		break;
 	}
 }
 
@@ -514,7 +506,6 @@ main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
 	signal(SIGQUIT, sighandler);
 	signal(SIGABRT, sighandler);
 	signal(SIGTERM, sighandler);
-	signal(SIGKILL, sighandler);
 
 	/* init */
 	setbuf(stdout, NULL); /* unbuffered stdout */