On 09/14/2011 03:37 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
...

Then it is not a zombie. Zombies are exited processes which still have their
parent, but the parent has not (yet) collected their exit status.

...

From the 'ps' man page:

"Processes marked <defunct> are dead processes (so-called "zombies")
that remain because their parent has not destroyed them properly. These
processes will be destroyed by init(8) if the parent process exits."


In my experience, zombie processes have a parent process ID of 1 (init)
by the time I discover them.



--
Josh Miller
Open Source Solutions Architect
http://itsecureadmin.com/

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

On 14Sep2011 15:45, Josh Miller <joshua@itsecureadmin.com> wrote:
| On 09/14/2011 03:37 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
| >Then it is not a zombie. Zombies are exited processes which still have their
| >parent, but the parent has not (yet) collected their exit status.
|
| From the 'ps' man page:
|
| "Processes marked <defunct> are dead processes (so-called "zombies")
| that remain because their parent has not destroyed them properly.
| These processes will be destroyed by init(8) if the parent process
| exits."
|
| In my experience, zombie processes have a parent process ID of 1
| (init) by the time I discover them.

It's not my experience, and indeed the man page you quote suggests it
should not be your experience, since process 1 _is_ init. To be a zombie
with process 1 as your parent is at best a very very transient thing,
since init collects all its children almost instantly; indeed, aside
from mediating runlevels this is init's major function.

I would really be very interested in seeing a cut/paste of a real world ps
listing showing what you describe.

It is quite possible to have processes with parent id 1, but I would
never expect them to be zombies.

Cheers,
--
Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/

Processes are like potatoes. - NCR device driver manual

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Cameron Simpson wrote:

On 14Sep2011 15:45, Josh Miller <joshua@itsecureadmin.com> wrote:
| On 09/14/2011 03:37 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
| >Then it is not a zombie. Zombies are exited processes which still have their
| >parent, but the parent has not (yet) collected their exit status.

<snip> |

| In my experience, zombie processes have a parent process ID of 1
| (init) by the time I discover them.

It's not my experience, and indeed the man page you quote suggests it
should not be your experience, since process 1 _is_ init. To be a zombie
with process 1 as your parent is at best a very very transient thing,
since init collects all its children almost instantly; indeed, aside
from mediating runlevels this is init's major function.

<snip>
Well, no. When I see zombies, they've already gone to a parent process
of 1, and they are *not* transient: if they go away, it's a long time -
we're talking hours or days; more often, it takes a reboot.


mark
--
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean you don't have real enemies.

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

On 15Sep2011 07:59, mark <m.roth@5-cent.us> wrote:
| Cameron Simpson wrote:
| >On 14Sep2011 15:45, Josh Miller <joshua@itsecureadmin.com> wrote:
| >| On 09/14/2011 03:37 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
| >| >Then it is not a zombie. Zombies are exited processes which still have their
| >| >parent, but the parent has not (yet) collected their exit status.
| <snip> |
| >| In my experience, zombie processes have a parent process ID of 1
| >| (init) by the time I discover them.
| >
| >It's not my experience, and indeed the man page you quote suggests it
| >should not be your experience, since process 1 _is_ init. To be a zombie
| >with process 1 as your parent is at best a very very transient thing,
| >since init collects all its children almost instantly; indeed, aside
| >from mediating runlevels this is init's major function.
| <snip>
| Well, no. When I see zombies, they've already gone to a parent
| process of 1, and they are *not* transient: if they go away, it's a
| long time - we're talking hours or days; more often, it takes a
| reboot.

Please: show me a cut/paste of a real world ps of this. I really want to
see it.
--
Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/

I do not want people to be agreeable, as it saves me the trouble of liking
them. - Jane Austen

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 15Sep2011 07:59, mark <m.roth@5-cent.us> wrote:
> | Cameron Simpson wrote:
> | >On 14Sep2011 15:45, Josh Miller <joshua@itsecureadmin.com> wrote:
> | >| On 09/14/2011 03:37 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> | >| >Then it is not a zombie. Zombies are exited processes which still
<snip>
> | >with process 1 as your parent is at best a very very transient thing,
> | >since init collects all its children almost instantly; indeed, aside
> | >from mediating runlevels this is init's major function.
> | <snip>
> | Well, no. When I see zombies, they've already gone to a parent
> | process of 1, and they are *not* transient: if they go away, it's a
> | long time - we're talking hours or days; more often, it takes a
> | reboot.
>
> Please: show me a cut/paste of a real world ps of this. I really want to
> see it.

Sure... next time I get one. I don't exactly create them.

mark

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list