IssueRaiser

This is a stupidly annoying problem because it's _very easy_ to accidentally spawn children that won't get killed up in many kill situati...

This is a stupidly annoying problem because it's _very easy_ to accidentally spawn children that won't get killed up in many kill situations because the distinction between processes and process groupes papered over by the fact that shells will be nice enough to kill via process group. But if your program is some TUI in raw mode its ctrl+c handler is often just killing itself... leaving its children along! Process groups in Unix are a stupid mess and the default being "a process can go away with the subprocess sticking around" rather than the inverse has just caused so many of these long-standing issues.

Posted by rtpg on Mar 21, 2026, 8:05 AM

Tags

Related issues

Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.2,000 issues0 comments

hackernews (Other)

This is a stupidly annoying problem because it's _very easy_ to accidentally spawn children that won't get killed up in many kill situati...

rtpgMar 21, 2026, 8:05 AM

This is a stupidly annoying problem because it's _very easy_ to accidentally spawn children that won't get killed up in many kill situations because the distinction between processes and process groupes papered over by the fact that shells will be nice enough to kill via process group. But if your program is some TUI in raw mode its ctrl+c handler is often just killing itself... leaving its children along! Process groups in Unix are a stupid mess and the default being "a process can go away with the subprocess sticking around" rather than the inverse has just caused so many of these long-standing issues.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Start the discussion.

Comment on this issue