This sounds like an OS or kill bug not a with the program. Sending `kill -9`, aka `kill -KILL` is supposed to terminate the process immediately without giving it the opportunity to catch the signal and respond. (This is why you should start with `kill -TERM` and only resort to `kill -KILL` if that does not work.)

So if the process is not terminated this is an OS or kill issue because the process itself is not given a chance to catch the signal.

▲

fsckboy 6 days ago | parent [-]

even if it's an OS or kill bug, most processes do reliably get killed with -9 so it's something that this program is doing is where to look/how to reproduce.

▲

drdec 5 days ago | parent [-]

It shouldn't matter what the program is doing or not, it's an OS (or kill) level bug. Even if you can make changes to the program so it doesn't happen, it's still an OS/kill level bug. The OS is supposed to terminate the process. A process is not supposed to be able to prevent the OS from doing that.

	▲	fsckboy 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		correct, and virtually all programs get killed. so what is this program doing that seems to uncover the bug? "shouldn't" hides the flaw in your thinking, it is happening, that's the bug, so shouldn't is out the window