Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:43:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:43:13 -0500 Received: from [195.66.192.167] ([195.66.192.167]:16902 "EHLO Port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:43:05 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="PT 154" From: vda To: Chris Wright , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] kill(-1,sig) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:41:21 -0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] Cc: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To:

<20011217013445.A30669@figure1.int.wirex.com> In-Reply-To: <20011217013445.A30669@figure1.int.wirex.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01121712412100.02022@manta> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 17 December 2001 07:34, Chris Wright wrote: > * Linus Torvalds (torvalds@transmeta.com) wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote: > > > The new POSIX 1003.1-2001 is explicit about what kill(-1,sig) > > > is supposed to do. Maybe we should follow it. > > > > Well, we should definitely not do it in 2.4.x, at least not until proven > > that no real applications break. > > > > But I applied it to 2.5.x, let's see who (if anybody) hollers. > > I had to back this change out of 2.5.1 in order to get a sane shutdown. > killall5 -15 is commiting suicide ;-( Hmm. Looking at killall5 source I see kill(-1, STOP); for(each proc with p.sid!=my_sid) kill(proc, sig); kill(-1, CONT); I guess STOP will stop killall5 too? Not good indeed. We have two choices: either back it out or find a sane way to implement killall5 with new kill -1 behaviour. -- vda - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/