--=_courier-20995-1052552387-0001-2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, May 10, 2003 at 02:29:54AM -0400, Chris Friesen wrote:
> I see two immediate uses for this. One would be to enable a "watcher"=20
> process which can do useful things on the death of processes which=20
> registered with it (logging, respawning, notifying other processes,
> etc). =20
Do it from user space, kill(pid, 0), check for ESRCH. I might see the
benefit of a new system call if it was synchronous (wait() semantics),
but since signal delivery is asynch anyway....=20
> The second would be to enable mutual=20
> suicide pacts between processes. (I'm not sure when I would use this, but=
=20
> it sounds kind of fun.)
Same thing, kill(pid, 0).
> Anyone have any opinions on this? =20
There's already a well established way to do what you want (get
non-immediate notification of process death). What benefit would your
approach give?=20
--=20
Muli Ben-Yehuda
http://www.mulix.org
--=_courier-20995-1052552387-0001-2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+vKyCKRs727/VN8sRAoPYAKCF+9tHhx7cIPWjOdSBEF1H51dZZACeKZ4Z
m2zkdpjkRK4QOg8BSJ7dc44=
=3MNT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=_courier-20995-1052552387-0001-2--