Date:Mon, 22 May 2023 02:43:18 -0300
From:Aleksey Covacevice
Message-ID:
| I fail to see where the race condition in `true & wait -n` is.
It wasn't in the script - but in the implementation inside bash.
Chet has (apparently, I don't look at bash sources, and
On Mon, May 22, 2023, 07:43 Aleksey Covacevice
wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 3:07 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
> >
> > On 5/18/23 7:51 AM, Robert Elz wrote:
> >
> > > Apparently, in bash, if the code is running in a (shell) loop (like
> inside
> > > a while, or similar, loop) then each iteration
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 3:07 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
>
> On 5/18/23 7:51 AM, Robert Elz wrote:
>
> > Apparently, in bash, if the code is running in a (shell) loop (like inside
> > a while, or similar, loop) then each iteration around the loop, any jobs
> > that
> > have exited, but not been cleaned
On 5/19/23 6:24 AM, Robert Elz wrote:
Date:Thu, 18 May 2023 14:07:32 -0400
From:Chet Ramey
Message-ID:
| This isn't a problem, and is a red herring. The code that manages that list
| makes sure to keep as many jobs in the list as POSIX requires, subject
Date:Thu, 18 May 2023 14:07:32 -0400
From:Chet Ramey
Message-ID:
| This isn't a problem, and is a red herring. The code that manages that list
| makes sure to keep as many jobs in the list as POSIX requires, subject to
| the maxchild resource limit.
That is
On 5/18/23 7:51 AM, Robert Elz wrote:
Apparently, in bash, if the code is running in a (shell) loop (like inside
a while, or similar, loop) then each iteration around the loop, any jobs that
have exited, but not been cleaned already, are removed from the queue (the
jobs table in practice,
On 5/18/23 12:16 AM, Martin D Kealey wrote:
If there is silent reaping going on (other than “wait -n” or “trap ...
SIGCHLD”) shouldn't the exit status and pid of each silently reaped process
be retained in a queue that “wait -n“ can extract from, in order to
maintain the reasonable expected
Date:Thu, 18 May 2023 07:35:35 -0400
From:Greg Wooledge
Message-ID:
| I'm fairly sure most (or all?) shells do this, not just bash.
Interactive shells are "different" from those running a script in
this regard.
kre
Date:Thu, 18 May 2023 14:16:17 +1000
From:Martin D Kealey
Message-ID:
| I know that some platforms (used to?) lack all of the âwaitpid()â,
This is irrelevant to the issue at hand (and in general, for shells, is
irrelevant anyway, as shells usually always
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 02:16:17PM +1000, Martin D Kealey wrote:
> If there is silent reaping going on (other than “wait -n” or “trap ...
> SIGCHLD”) [...]
Yes, bash silently reaps child processes.
unicorn:~$ tty
/dev/pts/2
unicorn:~$ sleep 5 & sleep 7 &
[1] 942813
[2] 942814
unicorn:~$ tty
On Thu, 18 May 2023 at 02:13, Chet Ramey wrote:
> It's possible for the shell to reap both background jobs before `wait -n'
> is called. The underlying function returns < 0 when there aren't any
> unwaited-for jobs, which the wait builtin translates to 127.
>
I know that some platforms (used
On 5/16/23 1:35 PM, Aleksey Covacevice wrote:
Bash Version: 5.1
Patch Level: 16
Release Status: release
Description:
`wait -n` sometimes returns with status code 127 even though there are
unwaited-for children.
There are not. That's why `wait -n' returns 127.
Repeat-By:
The following
On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 12:21 PM Oğuz İsmail Uysal <
oguzismailuy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This boils down to the following
>
> true &
> false &
> wait -n
>
> There is no guarantee that `wait -n' will report the status of `true',
> the shell may acquire the status of `false' first.
Date:Wed, 17 May 2023 17:23:21 +1000
From:Martin D Kealey
Message-ID:
| I suspect putting "local" in a loop is doing something strange.
"local" is an executable statement, not a declaration (shell really
has none of the latter) - every time it is executed it
On 5/17/23 3:27 PM, Martin D Kealey wrote:
On Wed, 17 May 2023 at 20:20, Oğuz İsmail Uysal
wrote:
On 5/16/23 8:35 PM, Aleksey Covacevice wrote:
[original code elided as it's been mangled by line-wrapping]
This boils down to the following
true &
false &
On 5/16/23 8:35 PM, Aleksey Covacevice wrote:
waitjobs() { local status=0 while true; do local code=0; wait -n ||
code=$? ((code == 127)) && break ((!code)) || status=$code done return
$status } # Eventually finishes: while true; do ( true & false &
waitjobs ) && break; done
This boils down
On Wed, 17 May 2023 at 03:35, Aleksey Covacevice <
aleksey.covacev...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Description:
> `wait -n` sometimes returns with status code 127 even though there are
> unwaited-for children.
>
> Repeat-By:
> The following script does finish after a while:
>
> waitjobs() {
> local
17 matches
Mail list logo
