> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 10:48:46AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> > Silly me. When I thought through the impact of Paul's patch, I knew that
> > we would notice signal death of the editor. But I totally forgot to
> > consider that the blocked signal is inherited by the child process. I
> > think we just need to move the signal() call to after we've forked. Like
> > this (on top of Paul's patch):
> > [...]
> > Note that this will give you a slightly verbose message from git.
> > Potentially we could notice editor death due to SIGINT and suppress the
> > message, under the assumption that the user hit ^C and does not need to
> > be told.
> Here's a series that I think should resolve the situation for everybody.
thanks! i've tested -- this certainly scratches my initial itch.
> [1/5]: launch_editor: refactor to use start/finish_command
> The cleanup I sent out a few minutes ago.
> [2/5]: launch_editor: ignore SIGINT while the editor has control
> Paul's patch rebased on my 1/5.
> [3/5]: run-command: drop silent_exec_failure arg from wait_or_whine
> [4/5]: run-command: do not warn about child death by SIGINT
> [5/5]: launch_editor: propagate SIGINT from editor to git
> Act more like current git when the editor dies from SIGINT.
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
paul fox, p...@foxharp.boston.ma.us (arlington, ma, where it's 56.3 degrees)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html