Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: kill -9 <pid of X> | Date | Wed, 12 Aug 1998 09:56:42 -0500 | From | Jon Hamilton <> |
| |
In message <Pine.LNX.3.96.980812092024.865A-100000@einstein.london.sco.com>, Ti gran Aivazian wrote: } On Tue, 11 Aug 1998, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: } > It' s not a kernel issue. If the X server run in iopl() and own the video } > card, _it_ must care that everything will return OK when it' s killed. } When one is killed one cannot care even if one had such intentions while } being alive.
Oh come on. If it's killed with anything other than signal 9, it can clean up before exiting.
} > It' s possible using a X wrapper that run as root (not as user) and wait } > for the child to die (once the X child is died the wrapper can restore the } > text console fine). } Well, what if you kill -9 the wrapper too?
If you kill -9 the wrapper, you get what you deserve. What if you pour water over the motherboard while the machine is running? Should the kernel attempt to guard against that as well?
-- Jon Hamilton hamilton@pobox.com
- 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.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |