Re: 'wait -n' with and without id arguments

[Zachary Santer]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 11:13 AM Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu> wrote:
>
> On 8/7/24 2:47 PM, Zachary Santer wrote:
>
> > Now I understand that this is because the list of terminated child
> > processes that 'wait -n' currently ignores is only used in the
> > interactive shell.
>
> Do you mean when no arguments are supplied?

Yeah, trying to avoid repeating myself too much.

> It's not. The difference is
> when a job is marked as notified and eligible to be removed from the
> jobs list.
>
> > If you want the behavior of 'wait -n' to be
> > consistent between scripts and the interactive shell, then it should
> > choose one terminated child process from the list of those that is
> > maintained in the interactive shell, if it's nonempty, to report to
> > the user and to clear from that list, any time it is called.
>
> That would make it different from wait without -n.

And that's fine. Why would you consider that a problem?