On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 12:56:20AM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> I agree with your analysis. I think your current behavior is probably best.
Ok.
> As I read the Linux implementation, a
> process dying (even by SIGKILL) will just stick around and block until the
> (unbounded) linger timeout expires, before it reports death to its parent.
> We will certainly never have behavior like that!
Mmmh. I think on exit the timeout does not apply (net/ipv4/af_inet.c:
inet_release):
* If the close is due to the process exiting, we never
* linger..
*/
timeout = 0;
if (sk->linger && !(current->flags & PF_EXITING)) {
timeout = HZ * sk->lingertime;
Thanks,
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de
_______________________________________________
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
