Date: Sun, 7 Sep 1997 09:17:57 +0200 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: jamil@counterintelligence.ml.org (Jamil J. Weatherbee) Subject: Re: SIGCLD Message-ID: <19970907091757.ST01979@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199709020249.TAA16490@implode.root.com>; from David Greenman on Sep 1, 1997 19:49:17 -0700 References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970901184254.3269A-100000@counterintelligence.ml.org> <199709020249.TAA16490@implode.root.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As David Greenman wrote: > Uh, I think you are misunderstanding this. Under FreeBSD, you *must* > call wait to reap child processes. Ignoring SIGCHLD doesn't let you off > the hook. The behavior is different under System V, but that isn't > relavent. The behaviour is different on SysV in that for SysV, SIG_DFL != SIG_IGN for SIGCLD. That is, while their default behaviour effectively ignores this signal, it isn't called SIG_IGN. By explicitly setting the signal handler to SIG_IGN, you tell the system that you aren't interested in the death of your child, and you won't get zombies. This of course is a terrible crock, but was the only way to express this in SVR3. SVR4 and Posix use the option SA_NOCLDWAIT in sigaction(2) to express this wish. FreeBSD doesn't implement this option (yet). -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970907091757.ST01979>