On 15Sep2011 07:59, mark <m.roth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: | Cameron Simpson wrote: | >On 14Sep2011 15:45, Josh Miller <joshua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: | >| On 09/14/2011 03:37 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote: | >| >Then it is not a zombie. Zombies are exited processes which still have their | >| >parent, but the parent has not (yet) collected their exit status. | <snip> | | >| In my experience, zombie processes have a parent process ID of 1 | >| (init) by the time I discover them. | > | >It's not my experience, and indeed the man page you quote suggests it | >should not be your experience, since process 1 _is_ init. To be a zombie | >with process 1 as your parent is at best a very very transient thing, | >since init collects all its children almost instantly; indeed, aside | >from mediating runlevels this is init's major function. | <snip> | Well, no. When I see zombies, they've already gone to a parent | process of 1, and they are *not* transient: if they go away, it's a | long time - we're talking hours or days; more often, it takes a | reboot. Please: show me a cut/paste of a real world ps of this. I really want to see it. -- Cameron Simpson <cs@xxxxxxxxxx> DoD#743 http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/ I do not want people to be agreeable, as it saves me the trouble of liking them. - Jane Austen -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
