On 4/11/2012 16:47, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> What happens, as I guess it, the SIGINFO and SIGCHLD are ignored, so
> kernel do not even bother to queue the signals to the master process.
> Register a dummy signal handler for your signals with sigaction
> before creating 'signal_handler' thread.
On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 17:47 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 08:26:13AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 16:11 +0200, Mel Flynn wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm currently stuck on a bug in Zarafa-spooler that creates zombies. and
> > > working around it
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 08:26:13AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 16:11 +0200, Mel Flynn wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm currently stuck on a bug in Zarafa-spooler that creates zombies. and
> > working around it by claiming that our pthread library isn't "normal"
> > which uses standa
On 4/11/2012 16:26, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 16:11 +0200, Mel Flynn wrote:
>> What happens is that SIGCHLD is never received by the signal thread and
>> the child processes turn to zombies. Signal counters never go up, not
>> even for SIGINFO, which I added specifically to see if
On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 16:11 +0200, Mel Flynn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently stuck on a bug in Zarafa-spooler that creates zombies. and
> working around it by claiming that our pthread library isn't "normal"
> which uses standard signals rather then a signal thread.
>
> My limited understanding of
Hi,
I'm currently stuck on a bug in Zarafa-spooler that creates zombies. and
working around it by claiming that our pthread library isn't "normal"
which uses standard signals rather then a signal thread.
My limited understanding of these facilities is however not enough to
see the actual problem
6 matches
Mail list logo
