Le 18/06/2016 10:41, Arnt Gulbrandsen a écrit :
> Didier Kryn writes:
>> Did you try it? The documentation of Bash is not clear. I think
>> it says that a bash script can only wait the processes it has
>> launched. Does it mean it maintains a list of them, or is it just the
>> consequence of the fact that any process but pid1 cannot adopt
>> others' children? In the last case, why the need to repeat it.
>
> Processes cannot adopt children; the kernel foists processes on pid 1
> without asking either pid 1 or any other process.
Sure but it does not need to be mentionned in the bash manual. In
addition, the bash manual does not mention it is generic. This what
raised my interrogation.
>
> Bash's source code is very, very large compared to zsh, which offers
> roughly the same functionality. The extra lines of code code have to
> do something, so it's entirely possible that bash tries to duplicate
> the kernel's list of children. Or not. I'm not going to look, it
> doesn't seem a useful thing to do.
I bet it is simpler to experiment than to dig into the source of
whatever-sh.
In general, I don't buy so easily the arguments about the
complexity of going through an interpreter (wether zsh or perl). I'm not
sure these interpreters are much more complex than the C compiler. They
are very well tested and you want them on your machine anyway. I'm not
making an argument in favour of interpreters, just trying to ponder
arguments against.
Didier
::
Re: [DNG] Mini init script written …
