I get it windows is evil and bloated, blah blah blah.
But to hear some of you describe the problems that you have using windows makes me think that you’re as incompetent as my grandmother.
Windows treats user commands like most tech treats consent. Negotiable, ignorable.
Linux brooks no bullshit. The program will do as it is told.
Oh sweet summer children… its worse. Linux tells the program to kill itself, then makes sure it happens
Android ain’t no better. If I don’t pull up my app list and manually kill my media player, it doesnt stop and drains the battery despite tapping the exit menu item
I fully support Linux, but Firefox doesn’t deserve that kind of heat. Yes, the Mozilla Foundation has been in hot water over the press release describing the direction and implementation of AI into the browser. But compared to the competition they are still are far better then the rest.
The joke’s not about Firefox; you could swap in any Linux program.
Microscum sucks soo hard it will see its own asshole as a new opening.
Lol as we’ve discussed before, inaccurate but funny.
So you’re telling me SIGTERM kill doesn’t actually send a hit squad to my house to assassinate the program? Lame.
Genuinely can you link the previous discussion?
While the meme is very funny, it is technically incorrect. Linux has two major ways of terminating a process. When Linux wants a process to terminate execution (for whatever reason) it first sends the SIGTERM signal to the process, which basically “asks” the process to terminate itself. This has the advantage, that the process gets the chance to save its state in a way, that the execution can continue at another time. If the process however ignores the SIGTERM signal at some point Linux will instead forcefully terminate the execution using the SIGKILL signal. This represents what the image shows.
Before someone gets mat at me: I know, that there are like 50 more Signals relevant to this, but wanted to keep it simple.
Simple answer for us simple folk. I like it. Thank you!
I think it is showing sigterm correctly. Sigkill wipes you from existence without leaving a body or trace of memory.
deleted by creator
Looks like someone got SIGKILL’d
Does the “SIG” stands for “Signal”?
Special Interest Group. An internal committee convenes to decide the fate of the process.
(I don’t know the answer, but I’m pretty sure it stands for signal.)
I like to secretly imagine it stands for SIG SAUER. Bang = process ded
Eh, it works more than 80% of the time.
The problem with Sig is they work too oftem, particularly when you don’t want them to
80% of the time it works every time!
You’re likely bumping into processes which are blocked by IO or are zombies.
I guess, but would have to look that up too (there are quite a lot of signals starting with SIG, so it would make sense that it is this way)
From what I’ve heard about Windows, it works more like the Simpsons “Barney coming up behind Moe” meme.
So, as it should be, Tux.
Stop spreading this lie. Linux has a more graceful shutdown process than Windows ever did. It doesn’t abruptly kill everything.
Windows has something called the ShutdownBlockReasonCreate API which enables apps with long running operations to prevent a shutdown to avoid corruption or losing work.
Is there an equivalent for Linux? When used appropriately, it makes shut downs even more graceful.
Systemd has something like this. I don’t know if the kernel itself does.
I don’t know the technical details, all I know is that if I click Shut Down while I have unsaved work open, it tells me about it and doesn’t just kill everything.
Unless you told him to do so. 🙃
Well, I don’t know whether it’s by default, but systemd does so - if the program doesn’t close in a timely manner (or there is an exception configured)
Windows:
- program refuses to shutdown
- system: okay, guess you don’t need your computer to turn off anyway
Such grace.
There is a windows registry hack to set the shutdown wait time for 1s and that did fix it for me. But every update they turn it back to unlimited.
(I ended up installing Linux, I only have the dnf5daemon server holding the shutdown up for atnost 5min now. But I haven’t tried to fix it)
Which is why in my Windows days I got a habit of turning computer off with Windows + R --> shutdown -s -f -t 0
Windows just works, my ass :)
Android/iOS users: What is “closing“? What is a „program“?
Android folks generally know because we have to close them sometimes. Don’t know about iPhoners
May use an iPhone but definitely use a Linux desktop.
Graceful like closing a laptop and putting it in a backpack only to have windows refuse to shutdown and become a heater until it cooks the battery and ruins the screen…
worse. windows literally goes to sleep when i close the lid after i told it to shutdown.
so when i boot it up again, what happens? inevitably it wakes from sleep, only to remember that i told it to shut down, then it shuts down. then i have to boot again.
To be honest, Mint is no better in that regard on my laptop. Closing my laptop and pulling the power adapter always results in the system not going to sleep mode, but remaining active. Opening it will actually cause it to resume going to sleep. Really annoying.
Isn’t that more of a PEBCAK?
I literally had this happen with my desktop last night, and it’s entirely down to Windows actively choosing to go into sleep mode or not. No activity on the computer, click on sleep, the monitors go off and I started to walk away except I noticed that my keyboard and mouse were still on (the first things to turn off when Windows goes to sleep for me) and the fans were still running. Wiggled the mouse and it had only turned the monitors off. I tried it 2 or 3 more times and Windows kept doing the same thing - putting the monitors to sleep and nothing else. I eventually just straight up shut it down with the power button.
It absolutely isn’t. If a laptop lid is closed, it needs to be sleeping, period. No random updates, no search indexing. I’ve also had this happen after explicitly putting laptops into sleep AND closing the lid. No idea how Apple is the only company able to do this consistently.
no search indexing
hear me out. how about … there doesn’t need to be a background process that runs constantly and consumes 30% of your processing power and makes the fan spin all the time because it generates so much heat.
I am stuck using an otherwise old but theoretically bearable PC at work running Windows 11 from a spinning HDD. But I’ll tell you, when I dug through the registry to turn off all the background indexing nonsense, it became damn near usable.
This absolutely can and does happen on Apple hardware
I haven’t used a mac for over a decade, but for the decade or so before that it never happened to me once, either on an iBook or MBP. Perhaps something changed in the meantime.
Apple laptops are typically extremely good when it comes to sleep and suspend.
A major advantage of having a very small range of hardware you have to support is that it’s pretty easy to test all possible combinations and make sure they work well together. As far as I’m concerned, Apple has been, and probably always will be the undisputed champion of doing this right.
Never happened to me lmao. Apple is for tech illiterates anyways so it’s inconsequential.
Nope. Go read about the “modern suspend” a.k.a. S0ix horror stories. Totally the fault of Microsoft+manufacturers, happens in Linux and Windows.
Windows task manager:
Let’s play a whack a mole game where the app you’re trying to kill constantly moves up and down a list by default! Enjoy!
There’s a non-obvious freeze function in the Task Manager - for as long as you hold the Ctrl key, it’ll stop updating the list. I have no idea why this functionality is hidden, but I guess Dave Plummer had some unusual ideas about UX.
Just sort by ram size
Ironically it’s actually the opposite. Linux has signals, and with the exception of SIGKILL and I think SIGABRT they can all be handled gracefully. Windows on the other hand doesn’t have signals, it can only TerminateProcess() which is forceful. The illusion of graceful termination on windows is done by sending a Window close message to all of the windows belonging to a given process, however in the event the process has no windows, only forceful termination is available due to the lack of a real mechanism to gracefully terminate processes. That’s why the taskkill command tells you a process requires forceful termination when you run it against something headless.
Windows does, in fact, have signals. They’re just not all the same as Unix signals, and the behavior is different. Here’s a write-up.
You’re correct there is no “please terminate but you don’t have to” signal in Windows. Windowless processes sometimes make up their own nonstandard events to implement the functionality. As you mentioned, windowed processes have WM_CLOSE.
Memory access violations (akin to SIGSEGV), and other system exceptions can be handled through Structured Exception Handling.
TIL about the console signaling stuff, good to know. I am aware of SEH but that seemed a little too in the weeds for this discussion since that’s as you say akin to SIGSEGV
The NT kernel was all built to emulate object orientation (read Smalltalk, not C++) style message passing. That’s because it was the 90s, and it’s the new technology kernel.
So yeah, expect everything to have more flexibility sending data around, and no standardization at all so you can’t have any generic functionality.
You’re right about Linux but you’re wrong about windows. It is sent to the event loop in windows https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/winmsg/window-notifications. It’s been a long time since it was my job, but you actually had to pass a certification that your application exited gracefully in response to these messages as part of the partner program back in the day.
You clearly didn’t read my message…I said a “window close message.” I.e…WM_CLOSE. that is not a process signal, it’s a window management signal. Hence taskkill not working without /f on headless processes
Long running headless processes on windows generally still have an event loop and a window handle via which they process those messages.
…right…tell that to cmd.exe or the OpenVPN daemon, or the soft ether VPN daemon, or OpenConsole.exe, or Idk, I only tested 4 that immediately came to mind but my point stands. There are a lot of programs that do not have a window handle and do not bother with window messages.
Service (daemon) lifecycles are managed via the system services api.
Yep, I’m aware of that too, doesn’t change my initial point
sig bart
It also means the OS is in total control of the things it’s running. This goes for running programs, shutting down, and crashing. The only crashes I have on my Linux are when I use up memory, and I’m still convinced that even though everything looks seized up, if I left it for hours or days it would probably end up resolving itself. I’ve had some cases where the OS saw the program wasn’t going in a good direction fast enough and killed it.
Most linux systems have two OOM killers, one in the kernel that will execute as a last resort when your system is already frozen up, and one in systemd that should run earlier to prevent your system from freezing up. That one works sometimes, I think it does an okay job actually.
That’s fucked up
Plus, if something seemingly can’t be terminated with that, 99% of the time it’s a kernel level lockup (e.g. disk IO). At which point you only have 2 options: kill it via a kernel debugger or (the more likely scenario) perform a reboot.
