James Cameron writes: > On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 07:14:13PM -0400, James Carlson wrote: > > An alternative might be to avoid sending signals to the process group > > if pppd is not actually the group leader. > > This would have the side effect of not terminating the processes that > pppd started. Wouldn't it be better if pppd made itself the group > leader? Yes ... I was just trying to understand how you got into that state. The detach() function (as long as you don't use nodetach) should get you into that process group leader status. Is it possible that the signal was sent before the setsid() was done (i.e., before IPCP went Opened)? If so, then we might need to tweak how the process group is managed in the special case of (at least) updetach. -- James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W <carlsonj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ppp" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
