lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] coredump: Retry writes where appropriate
> On the other hand, IMO all other signals, including SIGINT and SIGQUIT,
> should be ignored during core dumping. Allowing SIGKILL gives a method
> for getting rid of core dumps in the relatively rare situation where
> people want/need to do so, and I don't see any real benefit to adding
> more signals to the list of things you can't do if you want robust
> cores. Isn't one enough?

I also want usability. SIGINT/SIGQUIT are never sent except by user
requests to terminate a process so they can safely be allowed. If the
alternatives are the status quo or SIGKILL only then I'd favour the
status quo particularly having experienced the alternatives on some old
Unix systems.

Alan


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-01 19:53    [W:0.095 / U:6.864 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site