From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Functions in kill-emacs-hook aren't run if emacs gets killed with SIGTERM Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:05:40 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87prihxeu5.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> <878wp367gk.fsf@thinkpad.tsdh.de> <87mydircn0.fsf@justinbogner.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1232712370 26430 80.91.229.12 (23 Jan 2009 12:06:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 12:06:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: mail@justinbogner.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 23 13:07:23 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LQKob-0002oN-MY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 13:07:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53246 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LQKnJ-0006IA-Il for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 07:05:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LQKnD-0006F1-8X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 07:05:47 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LQKnC-0006Do-94 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 07:05:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41930 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LQKnC-0006Dh-1z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 07:05:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout1.012.net.il ([84.95.2.1]:17957) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LQKnB-0004bv-DW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 07:05:45 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout1.012.net.il by i-mtaout1.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KDX00F00AREW500@i-mtaout1.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:05:59 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.70.160.103]) by i-mtaout1.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KDX00D0DAXU0Q60@i-mtaout1.012.net.il>; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:05:59 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <87mydircn0.fsf@justinbogner.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 9.1 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:108146 Archived-At: > From: mail@justinbogner.com > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:15:30 -0700 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > >> From: Tassilo Horn > >> Is SIGTERM really such a fatal signal as you say? I always believed > >> SIGTERM meant "shutdown, but do it cleanly" whereas SIGKILL meant "Die! > >> Die! Die! NOW!". > > > > No, the reason is that SIGKILL cannot be caught or ignored, whereas > > SIGTERM can. Which has the practical effect that you mention, but > > it's IMO important to understand the underlying reason. > > I don't understand what you're trying to say. The reason that SIGKILL > cannot be ignored is that it means "Die! Die! Die! NOW!", and the reason > that SIGTERM can is that it means "shutdown, but do it cleanly". Ie, the > reasons and practical effects are exactly opposite of what you seem to > be saying: could you explain in more detail? I don't see how can I explain this in more detail, because you seem to mix a _meaning_ (i.e. semantics, which is a human thing) with the software implementation chosen to achieve it, which is the reason for the immediate exit. IOW, a meaning humans ascribe to some mechanism cannot be the reason for what happens when that mechanism is activated.