From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Feb 23 16:56:51 1995 Return-Path: questions-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id QAA21089 for questions-outgoing; Thu, 23 Feb 1995 16:56:51 -0800 Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id QAA21083 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 1995 16:56:50 -0800 Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1) id AA20593; Thu, 23 Feb 95 17:50:16 MST From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) Message-Id: <9502240050.AA20593@cs.weber.edu> Subject: Re: Odd behaviour in 2.0R To: root@vhf.dataradio.com (Charlie ROOT) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 95 17:50:16 MST Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: from "Charlie ROOT" at Feb 23, 95 05:34:35 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52] Sender: questions-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Maybe I am overlooking something fundemental here, but I can't for the > life of me get processes started by a user to die off when the user logs > out. If they are background tasks, they aren't supposed to die when the user logs out if they were started from a shell other than sh, or if they were started in sh with "nohup". A background process is not a member of the same process group as the foreground process, so it won't be sent a sighup when the DCD goes from on-to-off on the modem and all/some (there is disagreement on the exact implementation) of the processes in the process group get a SIGHUP -- assuming the modem is set up correctly and the line is -CLOCAL and HUPCL. Note that this *would* be a problem if the hardware were setup correctly but processes in the foreground didn't go away on DCD loss. Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.