On Tuesday 01 February 2005 01:47 am, Frank Sorenson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Doug Dumitru wrote:
> <snip>
>
> | With 2.6.9 skas3 v8 a plain kill does nothing.  With a kill -9, 3 of the
> | four thread die, but one remains and the only way to get rid of it is
> | with a server reboot.
> |
> | Not sure what is going on here, but I have not been able to get anything
> | past 2.6.7 to work while killing virtual rudely.
>
> Will they die if you send a "kill -CONT" followed by the "kill -9"?
>
> Frank

If a kill -9 needs to be followed by a CONT signal to actually take effect on 
a stopped process, why is this not a kernel bug?  (Kill -9 is supposed to 
_mean_ it.  I've always thought of it as the "with shotgun" option...)

Rob


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting
Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time
by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc.
Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

Reply via email to