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