executable ELF is rm-ed from disk, but still running RAM..

[Manish Katiyar]

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Mulyadi Santosa
<mulyadi.santosa at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all..
>
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 08:25, Pei Lin <telent997 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2011/5/30 Mulyadi Santosa <mulyadi.santosa at gmail.com>:
>>> Hi all..
>>>
>>> As the subject says, I was thinking about that issue.
>>>
>>> I know that rm-ing a file doesn't delete the data block from the
>>> backing device, thus the executable could still survive and running.
>>>
>>> But logically, we usually expect that once a file is rm-ed, it should
>>> also "stop", right? What does POSIX say about this case anyway? Anyone
>>> could kindly give his/her opinion?
>> In my view, i don't expect that rm one file should also stop the
>> related process. If that, in one system, do the thing "rm sysfile"
>> will stop OS running? In my logic, i just think run the executable is
>> the user's choice before "rm it", if the user want to delete file,
>> also who want to stop the process related this file should kill the
>> process themselves. I consider that if the users delete one file
>> uncarefully, should give the chance to recover it and not block
>> current running task.
>
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts so far. This came to my mind when I
> did a project about 2 years ago. At that time, I also came to very
> much same conclusion: if you want to make sure new binary is executed,
> sigkill/sigterm the old ones first, remove them and run the new one.
> Seems trivial, but initially this tiny little detail missed from my
> mind.

How will "rm /bin/rm" work otherwise ?

-- 
Thanks -
Manish