I am trying to send the SIGINT signal to multiple processes, I think this is right:
kill -2 <pid1> <pid2> ... <pid3>
but I cannot confirm that...
asked Sep 14, 2018 at 19:03
-
How could you test it?ctrl-alt-delor– ctrl-alt-delor2018-09-14 19:16:24 +00:00Commented Sep 14, 2018 at 19:16
-
that is a damn good question lulzAlexander Mills– Alexander Mills2018-09-16 06:03:27 +00:00Commented Sep 16, 2018 at 6:03
Add a comment
|
3 Answers
Yes, this is right. The man page confirms it. Running man kill says:
SYNOPSIS
kill [options] <pid> [...]
...
OPTIONS
<pid> [...]
Send signal to every <pid> listed.
Your shell probably provides its own internal version of kill, which will take precedence, but it should be compatible with the interface described. You may be able to find more info by running help kill.
I'd use kill -INT instead of kill -2, since the name-to-number mapping can vary between UNIX variants.
-
Thanks! This fixed my issue with my game server not saving, because it needed SIGINT instead of KILL and the number mapping was failing.ZaxLofful– ZaxLofful2022-03-23 07:20:26 +00:00Commented Mar 23, 2022 at 7:20
This is easy to test with program that generates a bunch of copies of itself, reacts to the signal, and sits around waiting for a signal:
% perl -E '$SIG{INT}=sub {say "ouch"};fork();fork();say $$;sleep 999'
17344
17346
17345
17347
ouch
ouch
ouch
ouch
Kurosawa wipe to the other terminal where a
% kill -2 17344 17346 17345 17347
was obviously run.
How about:
for i in <pid1> <pid2> <pid3>; do kill -2 $i; done
Or:
for i in {17344..17347}; do kill -2 $i; done
