Demi Marie Obenour <demiobenour@gmail.com> writes:

> It appears there are likely two or more bugs.  The first is that
> sending a signal to the run-vmm process itself is insufficient:
> it leaves child processes behind.  I don't know why that is.  Is it
> something you could figure out?

I would guess that this is because bwrap forks.  I noticed this the
other day.  I think the right solution for this, since we're not using
bwrap for anything complicated, is to replace it with individual
unshares, mounts, etc. that don't fork.