Terry Lambert wrote:
Linux has the SVR4 behaviour in that, if SIGCHLD is not caught,
zombies are reaped automatically, without the parent needing to
explicitly reap their exit status.
Most likely, they are installing a signal handler of SIG_IGN for
SIGCHLD, and expecting the standard behaviour f
Lars Eggert wrote:
> > >I've been running the guidescope web ad blocker
> > >(http://www.guidescope.com/home/) as a Linux binary under FreeBSD for a
> > >long time. The thing seems to fork a child for each web request it
> > proxies.
> > >
> > >Under -current, it seems that the child processes beco
Duncan,
Duncan Barclay wrote:
On 01-Oct-2002 Lars Eggert wrote:
>I've been running the guidescope web ad blocker
>(http://www.guidescope.com/home/) as a Linux binary under FreeBSD for a
>long time. The thing seems to fork a child for each web request it
proxies.
>
>Under -current, it seems tha
On 01-Oct-2002 Lars Eggert wrote:
> Duncan Barclay wrote:
>> On 01-Oct-2002 Lars Eggert wrote:
>>>
>>>I've been running the guidescope web ad blocker
>>>(http://www.guidescope.com/home/) as a Linux binary under FreeBSD for a
>>>long time. The thing seems to fork a child for each web request it
On 01-Oct-2002 Lars Eggert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been running the guidescope web ad blocker
> (http://www.guidescope.com/home/) as a Linux binary under FreeBSD for a
> long time. The thing seems to fork a child for each web request it proxies.
>
> Under -current, it seems that the child proce
Duncan Barclay wrote:
> On 01-Oct-2002 Lars Eggert wrote:
>>
>>I've been running the guidescope web ad blocker
>>(http://www.guidescope.com/home/) as a Linux binary under FreeBSD for a
>>long time. The thing seems to fork a child for each web request it proxies.
>>
>>Under -current, it seems tha
