Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 07:43:08 +0200 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ppp & HUP. Message-ID: <19970703074308.ML07825@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199707030302.NAA26921@godzilla.zeta.org.au>; from Bruce Evans on Jul 3, 1997 13:02:24 %2B1000 References: <199707030302.NAA26921@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Bruce Evans wrote: > >If nobody will explain why this HUP is neded (hanging shells perfectly > >killed by SIGKILL), I'll remove HUP sending from init. > > SIGHUP may have been to allow shells to propagate SIGHUP to children. > There may still be some problems here for parts of the process tree > not killed by the death of the controlling process. Perhaps shells > do a more complete job of propagating the SIGHUP? SIGHUP should be sent to all process groups associated with tty lines. clean_ttys() does this. So i think we should remove the SIGHUP salute that's being sent in death(), and replace it with a call to clean_ttys(). This will gracefully log off all tty-line associated process groups, without blatantly reconfiguring all daemons. Alternatively, the loop in death() should examine whether the process is in the list of active tty line process group leaders, and only SIGHUP them. -- 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?19970703074308.ML07825>