Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 15:38:48 +0200 (CEST) From: Igmar Palsenberg <igmar@...senberg.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: abort() fails to terminate PID 1 process > On 03/07/2016 15:58, Rich Felker wrote: > > Whether you realize it or not, what you're saying is equivalent to > > saying that it's UB for a process that runs as pid 1 to call abort(). > > There is no basis for such a claim. > > There's no basis in the specification, but in practice, on Linux at least, > a process that runs as pid 1 outside of a container and that exits - whether > normally or via abort() or anything else - will cause a kernel panic. So > treating that case as UB is defensible, at least until musl is ported to an > OS where pid 1 death is less dramatic. The old HP system we had at the university also paniced if I can remember correctly. To he honest, I have no sane idea what it should do otherwise. Igmar
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.