Re^5: killing on win32

When I'm doing it manually I rely heaviliy on the CommandLine info I get back from WMI, since I know what I started and with which arguments. That might work here.

In this case I was thinking about using the real pid you said came from the forking open and identifying my own from chaining real pid to real ppid.

I humbly seek wisdom.

Comment on Re^5: killing on win32

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: killing on win32 by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Sep 06, 2007 at 17:22 UTC
I rely heaviliy on the CommandLine info I get back from WMI, since I know what I started and with which arguments. That might work here. It would at best be a heuristic. Ie. an informed guess. For exampe, if he needed to run two copies of the daemon concurrently, there would be no way to distinguish between the essentially identical processes started by the two copies. It is also a very expensive way to allow him to continue to use fork. In this case I was thinking about using the real pid you said came from the forking open and identifying my own from chaining real pid to real ppid. Once he moves away from using fork and starts using some other mechanism that gives him the real pids--the two I mentioned, or even Win32::Process::Create() etc.--then he will already have a list of real process IDs and can use kill to kill them, so there is no need for WMI or Win32::Process::KillProcess(). Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. "Too many [] have been sedated by an oppressive environment of political correctness and risk aversion."	[reply]
Re^7: killing on win32 by goibhniu (Hermit) on Sep 06, 2007 at 18:48 UTC
Ah, I thought you were worried about the case where the real pid might be a shell and you didn't know about the child pids from that. I humbly seek wisdom.	[reply]