[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [STUMP] Watchdog code
From: |
Julian Stecklina |
Subject: |
Re: [STUMP] Watchdog code |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Oct 2008 23:29:38 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux) |
Vitaly Mayatskikh <address@hidden> writes:
> At Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:21:37 +0200, Julian Stecklina wrote:
>
>> I am currently rewriting run-program to not do that anymore. I hope this
>> fixes the last long standing issue with SBCL as stumpwm host.
>
> Are you going just to drop wait3 or to use other tracing facility
> (like ptrace)?
The idea is to make the whole thing race-free with respect to
signals. wait3/waitpid has to stay, since otherwise you raise an army of
zombie processes. :)
Regards,
--
Julian Stecklina
Well, take it from an old hand: the only reason it would be easier to
program in C is that you can't easily express complex problems in C,
so you don't. - Erik Naggum (in comp.lang.lisp)
- [STUMP] Watchdog code, Fredrik Tolf, 2008/10/20
- Re: [STUMP] Watchdog code, Fredrik Tolf, 2008/10/20
- Re: [STUMP] Watchdog code, Vitaly Mayatskikh, 2008/10/21
- Re: [STUMP] Watchdog code, Julian Stecklina, 2008/10/21
- Re: [STUMP] Watchdog code, Vitaly Mayatskikh, 2008/10/21
- Re: [STUMP] Watchdog code,
Julian Stecklina <=
- Re: [STUMP] Watchdog code, John Li, 2008/10/21
- [STUMP] time.lisp, ivy . foster, 2008/10/21
- Re: [STUMP] time.lisp, Shawn, 2008/10/22
- Re: [STUMP] time.lisp, ivy . foster, 2008/10/22
- Re: [STUMP] time.lisp, Shawn, 2008/10/22