Re: (forw) [DNG] Linux system can be brought down by sending SIGILL to Systemd

On 5/25/19 9:58 AM, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Michael Eager ([email protected]):
> 
>> It looks like the problem is in kill(2) not in init or systemd.  It is
>> kill(2) man page that says that it will only send "good" signals to proc
>> 1.  It isn't the init process that seems broken.
> 
> Is that indeed the problem?  The reporter said he crosschecked the same
> thing _with a different init_, and it didn't happen.  

Kill(2) sends an unaccepted signal to proc 1, in apparent contradiction 
to its man page, and some versions of init die and some don't.  That 
doesn't sound like a problem with the init process.

I don't have a horse in this race either, it was just odd that the first 
conclusion was that systemd must be broken and we're going to quote the 
man page for a different program to prove it.  As the OP said, we are 
not going to file a bug report against systemd, because they reject bug 
reports (perhaps because they are in different components).

-- 
Michael Eager    [email protected]
1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306