Re: Possible bug in wait4(), 2.1.126-129 ?
H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
9 Dec 1998 21:23:42 GMT
Followup to: <199811260501.NAA12838@typhaon.ucs.uwa.edu.au>
By author: David Luyer <luyer@ucs.uwa.edu.au>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Isn't it also fair to say that a Strictly Conforming POSIX.1 Application
> shouldn't fail to function due to being started by something that isn't
> one (crond)? While the behaviour is undefined under POSIX, should it still
> be inherited by a POSIX child? A POSIX personality process should, surely,
> be able to assume it can always wait() on a child, regardless of how
> POSIX-conformant it's parent was?
>
No, it isn't, because there is no way a Strictly Conforming POSIX.1
Application can detect and recover from that condition.
-hpa
--
PGP: 2047/2A960705 BA 03 D3 2C 14 A8 A8 BD 1E DF FE 69 EE 35 BD 74
See http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/ for web page and full PGP public key
I am Bahá'í -- ask me about it or see http://www.bahai.org/
"To love another person is to see the face of God." -- Les Misérables
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/