From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f94e9bacae9613b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-29 12:06:53 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Reply-To: "James S. Rogers" From: "James S. Rogers" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <6a6390b8.0301290704.7880bb16@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: tasking programs built with GNAT insensitive to SIGTERM X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:06:53 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.86.34.18 X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net X-Trace: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1043870813 12.86.34.18 (Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:06:53 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:06:53 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:33578 Date: 2003-01-29T20:06:53+00:00 List-Id: "David C. Hoos" wrote in message news:mailman.12.1043862309.30820.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Oliver Kellogg" > Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 9:04 AM > Subject: tasking programs built with GNAT insensitive to SIGTERM > > > > Hi, > > > > Under Linux, how come tasking programs built with GNAT > > (3.2, but other versions as well) don't react to > > "kill -TERM" ? > > Have you tried kill -KILL? Is it possible that the tasking runtime is > setting the program up to ignore SIGTERM? > > Another possibility is that because GNAT tasking is using Linux > threads, not all threads are receiving the signal. You can insure > that all signals in a process group receive a signal by specifying > the negative of the process group id in place of the process id > in the kill command. > > David > > > > Is there a trick to make them killable? > > > > See also http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl, > > bug number 9480. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Oliver A discussion of signals and Linux Threads on comp.programming.threads indicates that Linux Threads are broken regarding handling signals. This appears to have revealed the same weakness. Jim Rogers