Yes yes, I REALLY want to terminate that process and I am very sure about it too, ty.
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2024
722 points (94.6% liked)
linuxmemes
21130 readers
1075 users here now
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
- LemmyMemes: Memes
- LemmyShitpost: Anything and everything goes.
- RISA: Star Trek memes and shitposts
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
- Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
- Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html
2. Be civil
- Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
- Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
- Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
- Bigotry will not be tolerated.
- These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
3. Post Linux-related content
- Including Unix and BSD.
- Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of
sudoin Windows. - No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
4. No recent reposts
- Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And as always with this meme: Both Windows and Linux can ask a process nicely to terminate or kill it outright. And the default for both is to ask nicely.
Next, you'll tell me I shouldn't get all my news from memes!
on windows a process can get in a state so that it is impossible to make it go away, even with process explorer or process hacker. mostly this also involves the bugged software becoming unusable.
I encounter such a situation from time to time. one way it could happen is if the USB controller has got in an invalid state, which one of my pendrives can semi-reliably reproduce. when that happens, any process attempting to deal with that device or its FS, even the built-in program to remove the drive letter, will stop working and hang as an unkillable process.
Linux has that issue too. A process in an uninterruptible blocking syscall stays until that syscall finishes, which can be never if something weird's going on.
oh, that's good to know! iirc that's the same reason it happens on windows too
oh, that's good to know! iirc that's the same reason it happens on windows too
I've seen that on Linux as well. Funnily enough also with faulty file systems. I think NFS with spotty wifi for one.
Oh, and once with a dying RAID controller. That was a pain in the ass. At that point I swore to only ever do RAID in software.
oh yeah now that you say, SMB/CIFS mounted share if connection is no more. when I experienced this, it was temporary though, because there's a timeout which is half (or double?) of the configurable reconnection timeout. but now that I think of it, I'm not sure if it made it unkillable.
Add a -f to your umount and you can clear up those blocked processes. Sometimes you need to do it multiple times (seems like it maybe only unblocks one stuck process at a time).
When you mount your NFS share you can add the "soft" option which will let those stuck calls timeout on their own.
Well, with linux you get the option of sending mixed signals through the use of varying count of guns. I find 9 to be highly effective.
It's awesome Linux can STOP and CONT processes ngl
Because that's better for the software, Linux however kills it outright when it doesn't respond at all. Windows just... Waits. And you can't really hardkill the processes from the task manager. Or at last my last knowledge is that.
League of Legends captures and discards the ALT-F4 keystroke combination.
Microsoft trusts app developers to use Microsoft's standards (such as terminating the process when a close message is received) and they shouldn't. App developers like Riot have taken advantage of this trust and tuned their apps to act differently than expected, and include code which makes the app minimize to the system tray instead, or force the user to answer questions ("Are you SURE you want to close?"), or do nothing at all.
It should be punishable by death.
Linux programs can also capture signal calls. They usually only capture sigints so that they can close gracefully, but theoretically you could also capture a sigkill.
You cannot catch SIGKILL.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2541597/how-to-gracefully-handle-the-sigkill-signal-in-java/2541618#2541618
Thanks!
I mean, "are you sure" is useful... sometimes
You can easily make a program unkillable (or to be more precise untermable) on Linux. Here's a simple bash script that will do that.
Hmmmm...
Taskkill /f is reasonably close to sudo kill -9
Hitting the X in Windows and hitting the X in Linux both cause the application to start a save yourself routine. From the OS standpoint they're not far off.
The problem is we have a lot of confirmation bias in windows because every time we want to close an application that's not working, that save yourself call has to sit around for a hellaciously long time out followed by a telemetry call so that Microsoft can track that it happened.
It's pretty rare that Linux apps don't just close.