On 12/16/18 5:18 PM, Simon Ser wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Sunday, December 16, 2018 11:01 PM, Robert Elz <k...@munnari.oz.au> wrote:
>> | The chance of this happening in the future, when it has not happened
>> | so far, is vanishingly small.
>>
>> I agree that it would be very rare, which is exactly why now, it doesn't
>> really matter which way it gets defined. But I'm sue you've run into
>> users who just love to push the envelope and do the wierdest things,
>> which no-one had ever attempted before - having good, clear, definitions
>> helps avoid problems in those cases.
>>
>> | We'll see how it goes. It took a #define and three lines of code.
>>
>> Great, thanks, and yes, that's just about the same as it took me .. define
>> a new flag, set it appropriately (from pipefail) when creating the job, and
>> then use that rather than the pipefail opt value when collecting the status.
>>
>> Boringly simple, and, as above, really unlikely to bother any current users,
>> and makes for a much more predictable outcome when someone does decide
>> to do something bizarre.
>>
>> kre
>
> I'd like to bump this thread: are there any news about this?
There hasn't been any movement.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU c...@case.edu http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
