Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!adm!rbj@icst-cmr.arpa
From: rbj@icst-cmr.arpa (Root Boy Jim)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Trouble killing processes in Sy
Message-ID: <13282@brl-adm.ARPA>
Date: 4 May 88 19:48:32 GMT
Sender: news@brl-adm.ARPA
Lines: 29


   From: rjd@occrsh.att.com

   ::You ask about processes that refuse to die.  (Calling them "immortal"
   ::confers a positive aura that is probably undeserved.  Normally these
   ::processes are in a useless state, and might better be referred to as
   ::members of the "undead".)

     I think these are normally called "zombie" processes, are they not?

Technically, no. Zombies are already dead. These processes are on death row,
and will die when (if ever) they return from their uninterruptible sleep.

Killing a zombie has no effect, so they behave much the same way.

I believe that killing a process merely sets a bit in its signal mask, which
is not looked at until the affected process is rescheduled. Of course, if
the target process has higher priority and is otherwise ready to run, it
should preempt the killing process, no?

   Randy

	(Root Boy) Jim Cottrell	<rbj@icst-cmr.arpa>
	National Bureau of Standards
	Flamer's Hotline: (301) 975-5688
	The opinions expressed are solely my own
	and do not reflect NBS policy or agreement
..  I don't know why but, suddenly, I want to discuss declining I.Q.
 LEVELS with a blue ribbon SENATE SUB-COMMITTEE!