Pádraig Brady wrote: > Paul Eggert wrote: > > I'd like to have an option to 'timeout' so that > > it merely calls alarm(2) and then execs COMMAND. > > This would be simple and fast would avoid the problem > > in question. This approach has its own issues, but > > when it works it works great, and it'd be a nice option.
I agree. It is nice and simple and well understood. > The main problem with that is would only send the signal to the > first process, and any processes it started would keep running. Then that is a problem for that parent process to keep track of its own children. It is a recursive situation. If all processes are well behaved then it works okay. And if you ask about processes that are not well behaved then my response would be to fix them so that they are better behaved. Bob
