Re: wait() and strace -f

[Kurt Roeckx]

On Tue, Dec 18, 2001 at 04:59:58PM +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <[e-mail]> writes:
> 
> > I think it's related to strace being the "real" parent of the
> > child.  But that doesn't really explain why I need 2 childs.
> 
> Probably, it's feature (or bug) of strace. I'm seems, if strace has
> child, trace of a child is started before wait() of parent.  Then,
> exit() of child continue wait() of parent.

If I understand what you're saying, sleep(1) in child1, and
sleep(2) in the parent should fix the problem, which it doesn't.

And it still doesn't explain why it only happens with 2 childs.

Maybe I should have mentioned this before: the wait will clean up
the first child at the time the second child dies, or atleast
that's what wait() returns.

> >         if (!fork())
> >         {
> >                 /* Child 1. */
> 		  sleep(2);
> >                 return 0;
> >         }
> 
> The above change is continued the parent after 2 seconds.

I know that too, as I said, only when child 1 dies before the
parent calls wait().

Kurt