通过在prctl()系统调用中指定PR_SET_PDEATHSIG选项，子进程可以要求内核在父进程死亡时传递SIGHUP(或其他信号)，就像这样:

prctl（PR_SET_PDEATHSIG， SIGHUP）;

详见man 2 prctl。

编辑:这是linux专用的

我在过去通过在“子”中运行“原始”代码和在“父”中运行“衍生”代码来实现这一点(也就是说:你在fork()之后反转了通常意义上的测试)。然后在“衍生”代码中捕获SIGCHLD…

对你来说可能不行，但管用的时候很可爱。

Historically, from UNIX v7, the process system has detected orphanity of processes by checking a process' parent id. As I say, historically, the init(8) system process is a special process by only one reason: It cannot die. It cannot die because the kernel algorithm to deal with assigning a new parent process id, depends on this fact. when a process executes its exit(2) call (by means of a process system call or by external task as sending it a signal or the like) the kernel reassigns all children of this process the id of the init process as their parent process id. This leads to the most easy test, and most portable way of knowing if a process has got orphan. Just check the result of the getppid(2) system call and if it is the process id of the init(2) process then the process got orphan before the system call.

这种方法会产生两个问题:

first, we have the possibility of changing the init process to any user process, so How can we assure that the init process will always be parent of all orphan processes? Well, in the exit system call code there's a explicit check to see if the process executing the call is the init process (the process with pid equal to 1) and if that's the case, the kernel panics (It should not be able anymore to maintain the process hierarchy) so it is not permitted for the init process to do an exit(2) call. second, there's a race condition in the basic test exposed above. Init process' id is assumed historically to be 1, but that's not warranted by the POSIX approach, that states (as exposed in other response) that only a system's process id is reserved for that purpose. Almost no posix implementation does this, and you can assume in original unix derived systems that having 1 as response of getppid(2) system call is enough to assume the process is orphan. Another way to check is to make a getppid(2) just after the fork and compare that value with the result of a new call. This simply doesn't work in all cases, as both call are not atomic together, and the parent process can die after the fork(2) and before the first getppid(2) system call. The processparent id only changes once, when its parent does anexit(2)call, so this should be enough to check if thegetppid(2)result changed between calls to see that parent process has exit. This test is not valid for the actual children of the init process, because they are always children ofinit(8)`, but you can assume safely these processes as having no parent either (except when you substitute in a system the init process)

如果你无法修改子进程，你可以尝试以下方法:

int pipes[2];
pipe(pipes)
if (fork() == 0) {
    close(pipes[1]); /* Close the writer end in the child*/
    dup2(pipes[0], STDIN_FILENO); /* Use reader end as stdin (fixed per  maxschlepzig */
    exec("sh -c 'set -o monitor; child_process & read dummy; kill %1'")
}

close(pipes[0]); /* Close the reader end in the parent */

这将在启用作业控制的shell进程中运行子进程。子进程在后台生成。shell等待换行符(或EOF)，然后终止子进程。

当父进程死亡时——不管是什么原因——它将关闭管道的一端。子shell将从read中获得一个EOF，并继续杀死后台的子进程。

正如其他人指出的那样，当父进程退出时，依赖父进程pid变成1是不可移植的。不需要等待特定的父进程ID，只需要等待ID发生变化:

pit_t pid = getpid();
switch (fork())
{
    case -1:
    {
        abort(); /* or whatever... */
    }
    default:
    {
        /* parent */
        exit(0);
    }
    case 0:
    {
        /* child */
        /* ... */
    }
}

/* Wait for parent to exit */
while (getppid() != pid)
    ;

如果不想以全速轮询，可以根据需要添加微睡眠。

在我看来，这个选项比使用管道或依赖于信号更简单。

我认为不可能保证只使用标准POSIX调用。就像现实生活一样，一旦孩子被孕育出来，它就有了自己的生命。

父进程可以捕获大多数可能的终止事件，并尝试在此时终止子进程，但总有一些无法捕获。

例如，没有进程可以捕获SIGKILL。当内核处理这个信号时，它将杀死指定的进程，而不通知该进程。

扩展一下类比——唯一的另一种标准方式是，当孩子发现自己不再有父母时自杀。

使用prctl(2)有一种linux独有的方法——请参阅其他答案。