On 2024-05-30 00:19:30 +0700, Max Nikulin wrote:
> On 29/05/2024 07:44, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > But I don't understand why there was a timeout. Does this mean that
> > mutt didn't react to SIGTERM? Any reason?
>
> Have you tried to send SIGTERM to mutt?
I didn't. AFAIK, systemd sends a SIGTERM to all the processes of the
session: that's the
May 29 01:55:05 qaa systemd[1]: Stopping session-2.scope - Session 2 of User
vinc17...
but this timed out, apparently due to the mutt process, which was
still running, so that systemd sent a SIGKILL (which succeeded).
May 29 01:55:26 qaa systemd[1]: session-2.scope: Stopping timed out. Killing.
May 29 01:55:26 qaa systemd[1]: session-2.scope: Killing process 2990 (mutt)
with signal SIGKILL.
> If it ignores this signal or the reaction is some prompt then you
> need to find another way to stop mutt and to configure systemd user
> session to do it on logout (shutdown).
A SIGTERM normally kills mutt. In signal.c, signals are blocked
"while doing critical ops", namely for compressing/decompressing
(which I don't use) and when locking a mailbox (but I don't see
why this would have happened). Otherwise the signal handler just
does that:
static void exit_handler (int sig)
{
curs_set (1);
endwin (); /* just to be safe */
exit_print_string (Caught_Signal_L10N ? Caught_Signal_L10N : "Caught signal
");
#if SYS_SIGLIST_DECLARED
exit_print_string (sys_siglist[sig]);
#else
#if (__sun__ && __svr4__)
exit_print_string (_sys_siglist[sig]);
#else
#if (__alpha && __osf__)
exit_print_string (__sys_siglist[sig]);
#else
exit_print_int (sig);
#endif
#endif
#endif
exit_print_string (Exiting_L10N ? Exiting_L10N : "... Exiting.\n");
exit (0);
}
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
