From owner-freebsd-current Thu Jul 3 07:42:47 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA13172 for current-outgoing; Thu, 3 Jul 1997 07:42:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagual.pp.ru (ache.relcom.ru [194.58.229.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA13167 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 1997 07:42:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from ache@localhost) by nagual.pp.ru (8.8.6/8.8.5) id SAA01098; Thu, 3 Jul 1997 18:42:25 +0400 (MSD) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 18:42:22 +0400 (MSD) From: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= To: Joerg Wunsch cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ppp & HUP. In-Reply-To: <19970703074308.ML07825@uriah.heep.sax.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 3 Jul 1997, J Wunsch wrote: > SIGHUP should be sent to all process groups associated with tty lines. It is not so obvious thing. Some software (like uucp) which really use HUP from control tty treat is as carrier lost and redials immediately. It can cause very bad effects f.e. phone bill leak. I.e. imagine modem which redial at hangup and successfully connect while machine goes down at this moment... It seems that no SIGHUP sending not break anything, but sending it is dangerous. -- Andrey A. Chernov http://www.nagual.pp.ru/~ache/