Xref: utzoo comp.unix.questions:28742 comp.unix.internals:2066 comp.unix.wizards:24132
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!think.com!linus!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery
From: allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: SIGCONT occurs after a SIGTERM
Message-ID: <1991Feb15.005623.9724@NCoast.ORG>
Date: 15 Feb 91 00:56:23 GMT
References: <7103@fs1.cam.nist.gov>
Reply-To: allbery@ncoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR)
Followup-To: comp.unix.questions
Organization: North Coast Public Access Un*x (ncoast)
Lines: 18

As quoted from <7103@fs1.cam.nist.gov> by coleman@cam.nist.gov (Sean Sheridan Coleman X5672):
+---------------
| Please explain to me why a SIGCONT is sent to a process after
| SIGTERM is sent to my process. It doesn't compute because TERM
+---------------

Being suspended, it wouldn't execute the signal handler unless it were
continued.  Also, I think the exit processing in the kernel needs this.
(So why does the SIGCONT handler run after the SIGTERM handler?  Because
signal handlers are invoked in signal-number order.)

++Brandon
(BSD folks feel free to correct me.)
-- 
Me: Brandon S. Allbery			    VHF/UHF: KB8JRR on 220, 2m, 440
Internet: allbery@NCoast.ORG		    Packet: KB8JRR @ WA8BXN
America OnLine: KB8JRR			    AMPR: KB8JRR.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88]
uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery    Delphi: ALLBERY