waitpid() with WUNTRACED flag? (was Re: Hang on ctrl+Z after the MPSAFE tsleep/wakeup commit)

Tue Dec 27 13:17:33 PST 2005

On 27.12.2005, at 19:57, Matthew Dillon wrote:
    Which is more correct?  I don't know.  I think the userland program
    itself (the parent, as in your test program and in vipw) might be
    incorrect.
I think from outside it usually should each be an atomar operation:  
first stopping all foreground processes and later resuming all them at 
the same time.  So in the common case I think the parent shouldn't 
notice either, but I know that it's not possible in the way we process 
suspend signals now.  Except, of course, if we add another sleep point 
*in* wait.  Or am I talking nonsense?  (Few sleep at the moment)

cheers
  simon
--
Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
Work - Mac      +++  space for low â‚¬â‚¬â‚¬ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \
Attachment:
PGP.sig
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pgp00000.pgp
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: "Description: This is a digitally signed message part"
URL: <http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/bugs/attachments/20051227/3201d8a8/attachment-0022.obj>