Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:46507 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 90689 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2009 17:13:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 23 Dec 2009 17:13:14 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=rasmus@lerdorf.com; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=rasmus@lerdorf.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lerdorf.com from 209.85.210.192 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: rasmus@lerdorf.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.210.192 mail-yx0-f192.google.com Received: from [209.85.210.192] ([209.85.210.192:34070] helo=mail-yx0-f192.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 2F/D1-17066-9AF423B4 for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:13:14 -0500 Received: by yxe30 with SMTP id 30so8394229yxe.29 for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:13:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.150.113.13 with SMTP id l13mr15908900ybc.248.1261588390756; Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:13:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.200.22? (c-98-234-184-167.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [98.234.184.167]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 5sm3303921yxd.53.2009.12.23.09.13.08 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:13:09 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B324FA3.5010703@lerdorf.com> Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:13:07 -0800 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tjerk Anne Meesters CC: PHP Developers Mailing List References: <4B31D462.9080507@lerdorf.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] ignore_user_abort=true for sapi/cli From: rasmus@lerdorf.com (Rasmus Lerdorf) No, ignore_user_abort has no effect on what the process does when it receives a SIGHUP, so that isn't relevant. -Rasmus Tjerk Anne Meesters wrote: > Maybe to make it respond to SIGHUP signals? Not exactly sure whether > that would constitute as user_abort though. > > On 12/23/09, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: >> Can anyone think of a situation where you actually want our current >> ignore_user_abort=false setting for the cli sapi? >> >> -Rasmus >> >> -- >> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> >> > >