Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:6912 comp.unix.wizards:8334
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!ucsd!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!hp-sdd!ncr-sd!ncrlnk!ncrwic!ksuvax1!tar
From: tar@ksuvax1.cis.ksu.edu (Tim Ramsey)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re:  processes (was Re: Trouble killing processes in SysV/AT)
Message-ID: <280@ksuvax1.cis.ksu.edu>
Date: 5 May 88 21:03:09 GMT
References: <3951@killer.UUCP> <77@lakart.UUCP> <9349@sol.ARPA>
Reply-To: tar@ksuvax1.UUCP (Tim Ramsey)
Followup-To: comp.unix.questions
Distribution: na
Organization: Kansas State University, Dept of Computing & Information Sciences
Lines: 16

In article <9349@sol.ARPA> jpayne@cs.rochester.edu (Jonathan Payne) writes:
>
>If the parent dies before waiting for any of it's children, it becomes
>the responsibility of the parent of the parent to do the waiting, which
>is usually init(8).  ...

Wrong.  When a process dies, init(8) inherits its children.  There is no
notion of "grandparent" in UNIX.

Tim Ramsey
--------
Timothy Ramsey (aka Nop)            Dept of Computing & Information Sciences
               "Deadlines amuse me"          Kansas State University
Internet: tar@ksuvax1.cis.ksu.edu            Manhattan, Kansas 66506
BITNET:   tar@KSUVAX1 -or- NOP@KSUVM              (913) 532-6350
UUCP:     {cbosgd,pyramid,ihnp4}!ncr-sd!ncrwic!ksuvax1!tar