[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       fedora-desktop-list
Subject:    Re: musings on session service mgmt
From:       David Zeuthen <davidz () redhat ! com>
Date:       2008-01-04 16:40:05
Message-ID: 1199464805.3080.36.camel () oneill ! fubar ! dk
[Download RAW message or body]


On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 11:37 -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 11:29 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> 
> > Maybe it's just me, but I think it's a lot easier to just fix the few
> > programs such as screen and nohup to opt out of getting reaped.. 
> 
> Unix has had a pretty standard definition of "session" using SIGHUP.
> The way programs have historically "opted out" of termination is to
> ignore that signal.
> 
> I don't think we should change that.

Fine so we send a SIGHUP instead of SIGTERM, then SIGKILL. Makes this a
lot easier.....

> Rather, some programs should be fixed to gain a dep on X11, DBus, or be
> run through the babysitter.

Why do you think it's a good idea to add libX11 or libdbus deps to a
program that don't use either? Do you think random upstream projects
would ever take such patches?

      David


-- 
Fedora-desktop-list mailing list
Fedora-desktop-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]