bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

[Jonny Grant]

On 06/06/2020 00:37, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 2020-06-01 10:01, Jonny Grant wrote:
> > My mistake missing that. But could the 137 be listed explicitly?
> > ie.
> > "It may be  necessary  to  use the KILL (9) signal, since this signal cannot be 
> > caught, in which case the exit status is
> > 137 (128+9) rather than 124."
>
> thanks for the suggestion.
>
> I think this could still be improved:
> there is still the open question what happens when the KILL signal
> is sent either to timeout(1) or to COMMAND.
> The attached patch tries to clarify.
>
> Have a nice day,
> Berny

Hello Berny

Great patch.

How about writing signal 9 by the name, ie $ kill -s KILL
likewise $ kill -s TERM

Cheers, Jonny