Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > I think that's incorrect information to the user :-(
> > > If the child terminates with exit(1), we will then say "child process
> > > was terminated by exception 1. This seems to be a bug", which is clearly
> > > not true.
> > > 
> > > Unless you know a sure way of determining if the exitcode is a normal
> > > exitcode or an exception code.
> > 
> > Current CVS believes values >= 0x100 are non-exit() terminations.
> Why does it do that :-) That's clearly wrong. There are plenty of
> exitcodes > 0x100 that aren't exceptions.

Please read include/port/win32.h comment section on this and then reply.
We only care about non-exit() exits.

  Bruce Momjian   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to