Subject: Re: proposal for Linux exit_group emulation
To: Emmanuel Dreyfus <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/02/2005 12:18:25
On Dec 2, 4:47pm, email@example.com (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: proposal for Linux exit_group emulation
| On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 10:26:14AM -0500, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > | In userret to catch processes sleeping in the kernel
| > | In syscall to catch processes running in userland. I realize this is
| > | poor since the process could spend quite some time before going in
| > | the kernel. Sending it a signal is not possible because it will be
| > | reported to wait4(). What else can be done?
| > You have control over who gets notified in the wait call.
| Do I? If the parent is a native process...
In practice this is not a problem because usually the native process does
not care. Well, we could add a bit in the process flags to say, don't
report to parent if SIGKILL and bit set. That seems hackish too though.
| > | It works fine with java. I don't have the OpenOffice monster at hand.
| > You should install the monster, because this is the application that
| > usually breaks.
| It's an X11 app, that's a problem with the current configuration of the
| machine I'm working on...