OK, I see. I actually have some custodian thingies used in the child thread, but having genetic-programming incubation going on overnight, the whole VM is usually jammed. That's why I thought an extra, heavy-duty sandbox might "fix" the situation.
Of course, I could just learn use custodians properly... :) br, jukka > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew Flatt [mailto:mfl...@cs.utah.edu] > Sent: 18 March 2011 15:24 > To: Jukka Tuominen > Cc: users@racket-lang.org > Subject: Re: [racket] racket and OS threads > > > Oh, you need to create a custodian, make it the current custodian when > creating the thread (with `parameterize' and `current-custodian'), and > then shut down with `custodian-shutdown-all' instead of `kill-thread'. > > At Fri, 18 Mar 2011 15:17:30 +0200, "Jukka Tuominen" wrote: > > > > I tried first the original "system" procedure having > > (current-subprocess-custodian-mode 'kill) mode applied. But > that didn't have > > any effect on kill-thread, and for subprocess-kill I should know the > > subprocess id, I guess? > > > > What am I missing here...? > > > > br, jukka > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Matthew Flatt [mailto:mfl...@cs.utah.edu] > > > Sent: 18 March 2011 15:02 > > > To: Jukka Tuominen > > > Cc: users@racket-lang.org > > > Subject: Re: [racket] racket and OS threads > > > > > > > > > At Fri, 18 Mar 2011 14:57:34 +0200, "Jukka Tuominen" wrote: > > > > now the problem moved to converting the simple "system" > procedure to > > > > not-so-simple "subprocess" procedure. > > > > > > To use `current-subprocess-custodian-mode'? The parameter applies to > > > `system', too. > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________ > > For list-related administrative tasks: > > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
