On 05/29/2015 10:27 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> It has been suggested (e.g., >> <https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15661#c3>) that you can >> use the existing clone(2) without specifying SIGCHLD to create a new >> process. The resulting child process is not supposed to show up in >> wait(2), only in a waitpid(2) (or similar) explicitly specifying the >> PID. Is this not the case? > > Hi Florian > > That sounds orthogonal to what we're looking for. Our objective is to get > notification of when the child exited without resorting to SIGCHLD. If we use > the regular clone(2) without SIGCHLD and without CLONE_FD, we get no > notification. The only way to know of the child's termination is by a blocking > waitpid(2), like you indicated, which is counter productive to our needs. > > We need something we can select(2)/poll(2) on. Thanks for the clarification. I agree that this is a separate and quite sensible use case. -- Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
