termio: killpg expected to fail on darwin, still go into waitpid loop #2277
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Fixes #2273 On macOS, killpg is expected to fail with EPERM because of the way we launch a login process around it. Before this commit, this caused us to never call waitpid and reap the child process, which caused the child process to stick around as a zombie. This commit allows killpg to fail with EPERM on macOS and fall through to waitpid.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #2273
On macOS, killpg is expected to fail with EPERM because of the way we launch a login process around it. Before this commit, this caused us to never call waitpid and reap the child process, which caused the child process to stick around as a zombie.
This commit allows killpg to fail with EPERM on macOS and fall through to waitpid.
Note: posix process management is a topic that often confuses me so I might have this general logic wrong. If any experts have insight into making this more robust I'd love to hear it.