[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#9102: "timeout 0 FOO" should timeout right away
From: |
Alan Curry |
Subject: |
bug#9102: "timeout 0 FOO" should timeout right away |
Date: |
Sat, 16 Jul 2011 17:08:44 -0500 (GMT+5) |
Paul Eggert writes:
>
> "sleep 0" sleeps for zero seconds, and "timeout 0 FOO"
> should timeout in zero seconds as well. Currently,
> it doesn't; it times out in an infinite number of seconds.
> I see why, from the internals (alarm (0) is a special
> call intended to cancel alarms). However, 'timeout' shouldn't
> be exposing those internals to users; it should behave like
> 'sleep' does, as that's more consistent.
>
What's the difference between running a command with a 0 second timeout
and not running the command at all? It could be killed before it even gets
scheduled.
--
Alan Curry