<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On May 25, 2011, at 10:54 AM, Thomas Kluyver wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_quote">2011/5/25 Evan Patterson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:epatters@enthought.com">epatters@enthought.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Right, if you set 'independent' the kernel process will survive if the frontend process terminates, which usually isn't what you want.</blockquote><div><br>I thought as much. I *think* the critical bit is calling os.setsid() as we launch the kernel. If we do that as well as specifying --parent, will ParentPollerUnix still be able to kill the kernel when the frontend dies? A quick test suggests that it does, but I don't know much about these things.<br></div></div></blockquote><br></div><div>I think that ParentPollerUnix would still be able to kill the kernel reliably, but I'm hardly an expert on the subtleties of Unix process management.</div><div><br></div><div>I am wondering why this should be necessary at all, though. Shouldn't the kernel process always trap Ctrl+C signals at some point to prevent them from hosing the kernel? I've actually had a few problems with this myself. Sometimes when I interrupt the kernel from the Qt console, the whole kernel goes down.</div><div><br></div><div>Evan</div></body></html>