Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:13:58 -0800 (PST) From: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org> To: dwhite@gumbysoft.com Cc: bland@mail.ru Subject: Re: truss issue Message-ID: <200312152114.hBFLDweF068169@gw.catspoiler.org> In-Reply-To: <20031215084226.W81321@carver.gumbysoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 15 Dec, Doug White wrote: > My reading of it is that it is truss hitting itself with the same signal > that killed the process that it was tracing so that truss will exit > showing that it was killed by a signal. So this is actually implementing > the requested functionality. Processes that exit due to a signal don't > return an exit code. It seems keyed on 'sigexit' whatever that is. Hmn, I wonder if it would be cleaner to exec() the executable to be traced in the parent process and run truss in the child ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200312152114.hBFLDweF068169>