[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Fix exit status of signal handlers in shell scripts
From: |
Dmitry V. Levin |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Fix exit status of signal handlers in shell scripts |
Date: |
Sat, 30 Jan 2010 23:52:31 +0300 |
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:28:50PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> According to Dmitry V. Levin on 1/30/2010 12:18 PM:
> > The value of `$?' on entrance to signal handlers in shell scripts
> > cannot be relied upon, so set the exit code explicitly to
> > 128 + SIGTERM == 143.
> > * src/Makefile.am (sc_tight_scope): Use `exit 143' in signal handler.
>
> I'm not sure I like the direction this is headed in. Exiting with 143
> when a trap is known to be caused by SIGTERM might be okay, but it would
> be even better to reraise the signal and make the shell also exit by
> SIGTERM (in case the caller can distinguish between exit by signal and
> normal exit by status > 128). But blindly giving status 143 for other
> signals, like SIGHUP, is just wrong. If you are going to munge trap
> handlers to account for races, then you need one trap handler per signal
> with an appropriate exit status for each.
One trap handler per signal is overkill in most cases.
I think that any non-zero exit status would be sufficient.
--
ldv
pgpRn7XIJ_4Pp.pgp
Description: PGP signature