MUD-Dev
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
[MUD-Dev] Re: lurker emerges
[J C Lawrence:]
Hmm. This is under an odd subject, but what the heck...
>A common approach:
>
> fork a child.
>
> Have the child fork the editor.
>
> Have the child catch the SIGCHILD from the editor.
>
> Have the child send a normal IPC message (pipe, whatever) to the
> parent before terminating silently (turn off SIGCHILD).
>
> Have the parent respond to the message whenever it wants.
>
>True, its nasty, ugly, and brutish as well as being inelegant and
>resource expensive. It also works.
OK. Sounds good. But, if you are going to signal completion via a
socket message to the main process, and have the main process ignore
SIGCHLD, why do you need the extra level of fork/exec? Oh... duh! So
that someone can send the message, since the editor won't! I've
written this down as 'to do' - thanks for the suggestion!
--
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA
- Thread context:
- [MUD-Dev] Re: lurker emerges, (continued)
- [MUD-Dev] Re: lurker emerges,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Mon 10 Aug 1998, 02:18 GMT
- [MUD-Dev] Re: lurker emerges,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Mon 10 Aug 1998, 05:28 GMT
- [MUD-Dev] Re: lurker emerges,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Thu 17 Sep 1998, 02:19 GMT
- [MUD-Dev] Fw: lurker emerges,
James Wilson jwilson#rochester,rr.com, Sun 09 Aug 1998, 15:26 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]