Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!reed!intelhf!ichips!inews!pima!bhoughto
From: bhoughto@pima.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: SIGCONT occurs after a SIGTERM
Message-ID: <2519@inews.intel.com>
Date: 14 Feb 91 04:03:26 GMT
References: <7103@fs1.cam.nist.gov> <67880001@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com>
Sender: news@inews.intel.com
Organization: Intel Corp, Chandler, AZ
Lines: 13

In article <67880001@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com> conger@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com (Edward Conger) writes:
>The SIGCONT gets it unstopped and it runs long enough to
>terminate.
>Your mileage (and implementation) may vary, but this is the general gist of
>the problem.

Not the least of those variances is that signals may be
queued, so that the SIGCONT may simply be waking the
process up only to watch it go to sleep again (unless the
SIGTERM can somehow butt into the queue).

				--Blair
				  "Dave? Dave's not here..."