Re: 1.7.9-1: kill( pid, 0 ) on child before waitpid returns -1.

[Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>]

On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 03:12:44PM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote:
>2011/4/2 Marcin Konarski:
>> Subject says it all.
>
>Nope, it doesn't actually. Explaining why it's wrong would have been
>nice. Here's the relevant bit from POSIX:
>
>"Existing implementations vary on the result of a kill() with pid
>indicating an inactive process (a terminated process that has not been
>waited for by its parent). Some indicate success on such a call
>(subject to permission checking), while others give an error of
>[ESRCH]. Since the definition of process lifetime in this volume of
>IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 covers inactive processes, the [ESRCH] error as
>described is inappropriate in this case."

Thanks for the test case and the definitive source.  I've checked in
a fix and am in the process of building a snapshot to fix the problem.

It should be available in a few minutes at http://cygwin.com/snapshots/ .

cgf

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple