On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 07:06:23 -0800 Gordon Messmer wrote: > > Good question. Why is systemd not reaping zombies, as PID 1 should be > > doing? > > > Since it was in D state, it probably issued a blocking system call that > didn't return as expected and hung the application. Better question: Why is PID 1 the monolithic insanely complex "systemd" program? Why isn't PID 1 just an "init" process that does nothing but reap zombies and is much less likely to break due to some complex operation going wrong, updates modifying libraries out from under it, etc? Why not let all the complex stuff in systemd happen in PID 2? _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
