2019-08-08 11:43:53 +0100, Geoff Clare:
[...]
> I tested a complex (although not as complex as yours) AND-OR list in
> ksh93 and it treated the whole thing as one job:
>
> $ { sleep 3 | sleep 4; sleep 1 | sleep 2; } && { sleep 5; sleep 6; }
> ^Z[1] + Stopped { sleep 3 | sleep 4; sleep 1 | sleep 2; } &&
> { sleep 5; sleep 6; }
> $ jobs
> [1] + Stopped { sleep 3 | sleep 4; sleep 1 | sleep 2; } && {
> sleep 5; sleep 6; }
> $ fg
> { sleep 3 | sleep 4; sleep 1 | sleep 2; } && { sleep 5; sleep 6; }
[...]
See my message from last month on the subject, you've hit a
special case in ksh93 because "sleep" is builtin there.
In any case, for job control, you'll have a hard time specifying
something consistent that can be agreed upon by everyone. I
would give up straight away.
It is more important IMO to specify correctly the
non-interactive aspect as it would be easier to get a
concensus.
--
Stephane
