[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: programming questions. topics process , signals , IPC
On 12 May 1999, Alexander L. Belikoff wrote:
>guy keren <choo@actcom.co.il> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 11 May 1999 Nezer.Zaidenberg@ecitele.com wrote:
>>
>> > how can I convince child process not to send SIGCHLD to the father (and thus not
>> > remain zombie)?
>>
>> if i remember correctly, you could simply set the signal handler of SIGCHL
>> to SIGIGN (ignore), and then child processes are 'ripped off'
>> automatically by the system (at least according to w. richard stevens).
>
>Correct - that's in the parent. In the child, however, there is no way
>to"convince" it not to send SIGCH?LD - the system does it.
The only complete answer I know is, to make the child... stop being a
child. I.e. make it become a process group parent using daemonization
code as usual. This will still return a SIGCHLD but this will happen so
fast that the parent will still be there to catch it.
NB: I haven't done this. I just read about it.
Peter