[llvm-commits] [patch] Used TimedExec.sh everywhere

[Török Edwin]

On 2010-01-15 02:04, Rafael Espindola wrote:
>> Why SIGCONT? Wouldn't SIGTERM be more conventional? Or, would
>> SIGKILL be best, since you may not necessarily trust the
>> application's signal handlers to quit promptly?
>>     
>
> This is not to kill the application, it is to check that it is running.
> The idea is that kill will return an error if it cannot send the signal,
> that is why I changed it to a signal that will have no effect on a
> running application.
>   

The usual way to do that is kill -0 <pid>

Best regards,
--Edwin