[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined
From: |
arnold |
Subject: |
Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined |
Date: |
Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:05:39 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Heirloom mailx 12.5 7/5/10 |
"Andrew J. Schorr" <aschorr@telemetry-investments.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:08:01PM -0600, arnold@skeeve.com wrote:
> > Ugh. We may need to have 2 .ok files. Can you debug why you
> > get that status? The value I got is death by signal for SIGPIPE
> > (128 + signal number). You're getting something else...
>
> One line reproducer:
>
> bash-4.2$ ./gawk --lint 'BEGIN {print "hello" |& "cat"; print close("cat")}'
> gawk: cmd. line:1: warning: failure status (269) on two-way pipe close of
> `cat': Success
> 269
>
> strace shows:
>
> --- SIGCHLD {si_signo=SIGCHLD, si_code=CLD_KILLED, si_pid=3899, si_uid=300,
> si_status=SIGPIPE, si_utime=0, si_stime=0} ---
I get:
--- SIGCHLD {si_signo=SIGCHLD, si_code=CLD_EXITED, si_pid=29075, si_uid=1000,
si_status=141, si_utime=0, si_stime=0} ---
> > It may be due to differences in glibc.
It seems like my system is lieing to me ...
Arnold
Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined, Lorenz, 2020/09/15
- Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined, Andrew J. Schorr, 2020/09/15
- Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined, arnold, 2020/09/15
- Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined, arnold, 2020/09/30
- Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined, Andrew J. Schorr, 2020/09/30
- Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined, arnold, 2020/09/30
- Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined, Andrew J. Schorr, 2020/09/30
- Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined,
arnold <=
- Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined, Andrew J. Schorr, 2020/09/30
Re: fflush & close behavior not well-defined, Nelson H. F. Beebe, 2020/09/14