On 11 March 2013 14:58, Chow Loong Jin <hyper...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/03/2013 10:18, Lex Trotman wrote: >> Hi All, >> [...] >> My understanding of Unix/Linux signals is that the comment above is >> wrong and always has been wrong, a signal sent to a child process by a >> parent process does not get delivered to the parent. >> >> I don't know if anybodys memory is good enough to remember why the >> comment was thought to be correct (it was 2006 when it was committed). > > Perhaps it was a misunderstanding -- signals sent to the parent will hit the > child process, but not the other way around. (If it did, kill %1 in your shell > would kill your shell as well.) > >> For me simply using SIGTERM instead of SIGQUIT works fine, but does >> anybody have any more insight, since we don't want to have Geany stop >> unexpectedly when a user stops their running program. > > How about SIGINT, and failing which, notifying the user that the program > refuses > to stop, and allowing for SIGTERM or SIGKILL?
Well, sigterm is the canonical terminate signal (it is called SIG**TERM** after all :). Some programs catch SIGTERM so they can terminate nicely like closing files properly, so its a good idea to use it. One day someone will re-write Geany's terminate handler to be legal and Geany will do the same :) Cheers Lex > > -- > Kind regards, > Loong Jin > > > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.geany.org > https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.geany.org https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel