Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 23:16:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom <tom@uniserve.com> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu> Cc: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru>, FreeBSD-current <current@FreeBSD.ORG>, Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.org>, Joerg Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de> Subject: Re: ppp & HUP. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970702231446.8486D-100000@shell.uniserve.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970702225739.7680F-100000@Journey2.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2 Jul 1997, Chuck Robey wrote: > According to what I read, the HUP was to allow processes to be able to > exit gracefully (and more slowly, perhaps saving state) than the SIGTERM. > I think the HUP is kinda historical. I can't see a strong reason to kill > it, because I've never personally seen a bug caused by it. Exactly what processes actually exit upon receiving a HUP? Not many. Apparently only some user processes. Daemons NEVER exit, instead they thrash the system. Ugh. > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- > Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data > chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. > 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | > Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and picnic, both FreeBSD > (301) 220-2114 | version 3.0 current -- and great FUN! > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- > > Tom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970702231446.8486D-100000>