Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> Colin Watson writes ("Re: Bug#727708: upstart proposed policy in Debian"):>> and it requires no particularly exciting code in the init daemon since >> finding out about SIGSTOP already basically comes with the territory of >> being pid 1. > It comes with being the daemon's parent, even - the special powers of > pid 1 aren't even needed. I'm not sure that I understand. This is in the context of handling daemons that fork and background themselves, is not it? If so, no normal parent would be able to detect that this has happened because the process would have already been reparented by init before the SIGSTOP signal is sent. So it does rely on the special properties of PID 1, namely its adoption of all processes that have abandoned their parent process. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
