O> This is not meant as a security feature, if that's what your asking. > It will not prevent services from doing nasty things and escape the > process that started them. But it's still a feature that today only > PID 1 and which we need for more processes. I'm more worried about it beign a security flaw... > > IOW, imho this doesn't look very useful "in general" to me. > > It is very useful if you have an init-like daemon. Which is a special case > > > May be we need something else instead... And iiuc you don't really > > need to change the reparenting, you only want the notification if > > the process exits. > > No, we want to be the parent of the process, and we want to be the one > who reaps all the child process, not only receive some out-of-band > notifications. The sub-init is the babysitter of all the things it has > started, and that should be reflected in the parent child relation. Why ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
