bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-29 Thread Jonny Grant
On 28/07/2020 23:41, Bernhard Voelker wrote: > On 2020-07-28 23:53, Pádraig Brady wrote: >> +1 thanks > > Thanks, pushed. > Great!

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-28 Thread Bernhard Voelker
On 2020-07-28 23:53, Pádraig Brady wrote: > +1 thanks Thanks, pushed.

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-28 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 28/07/2020 22:38, Bernhard Voelker wrote: On 2020-07-16 00:59, Jonny Grant wrote: On 15/06/2020 21:57, Bernhard Voelker wrote: Hmm, in the HTML format, this is the first sentence after the table of contents: "This manual documents version 8.32 of the GNU core utilities, ..." Hi Berny

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-28 Thread Bernhard Voelker
On 2020-07-16 00:59, Jonny Grant wrote: > On 15/06/2020 21:57, Bernhard Voelker wrote: >> Hmm, in the HTML format, this is the first sentence after the table of >> contents: >> >> "This manual documents version 8.32 of the GNU core utilities, ..." > > Hi Berny > Just to reply on this item. >

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-21 Thread Jonny Grant
On 20/07/2020 21:04, Bernhard Voelker wrote: > On 2020-07-05 12:53, Jonny Grant wrote: >> Your patch looks great. > > Thanks, pushed (with the minor tweak mentioned below) at: > https://git.sv.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/commit/?id=49bd08aea > >> Is it worth clarifying that --kill-after=0s

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-20 Thread Bernhard Voelker
On 2020-07-05 12:53, Jonny Grant wrote: > Your patch looks great. Thanks, pushed (with the minor tweak mentioned below) at: https://git.sv.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/commit/?id=49bd08aea > Is it worth clarifying that --kill-after=0s would send the KILL signal > immediately after TERM? > $

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-15 Thread Jonny Grant
On 15/06/2020 21:57, Bernhard Voelker wrote: > Hi Jonny, > > On 2020-06-07 18:04, Jonny Grant wrote: >> Hi Berny >> >> Sorry I was meaning to give an example of a shell command to send KILL, but >> maybe it's not necessary. >> >> BTW, I saw the patch was applied. Great it's improved >> >> >>

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-05 Thread Jonny Grant
On 05/07/2020 00:25, Bernhard Voelker wrote: > On 2020-07-04 00:57, Jonny Grant wrote: >> May I ask if that exit status 137 could be clarified as 128+9, where 9 is >> the KILL signal number in this example please. I've pasted a patch below. > > Thanks for the patch - this is always a great

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-04 Thread Bernhard Voelker
On 2020-07-04 00:57, Jonny Grant wrote: > May I ask if that exit status 137 could be clarified as 128+9, where 9 is > the KILL signal number in this example please. I've pasted a patch below. Thanks for the patch - this is always a great basis for discussions. Well, this 128+9 arithmetic is

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-03 Thread Jonny Grant
On 03/07/2020 23:23, Bernhard Voelker wrote: > On 2020-06-15 22:57, Bernhard Voelker wrote: >> The attached is an attempt to add some useful examples. > > There were no comments, so I pushed with a few tweaks: > https://git.sv.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/commit/?id=b1c6ef230c > > Marking

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-07-03 Thread Bernhard Voelker
On 2020-06-15 22:57, Bernhard Voelker wrote: > The attached is an attempt to add some useful examples. There were no comments, so I pushed with a few tweaks: https://git.sv.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/commit/?id=b1c6ef230c Marking this as done. Have a nice day, Berny

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-15 Thread Bernhard Voelker
Hi Jonny, On 2020-06-07 18:04, Jonny Grant wrote: > Hi Berny > > Sorry I was meaning to give an example of a shell command to send KILL, but > maybe it's not necessary. > > BTW, I saw the patch was applied. Great it's improved > > > I saw this new line is clearer: > "Upon timeout, send the

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-07 Thread Jonny Grant
On 07/06/2020 13:39, Bernhard Voelker wrote: On 2020-06-06 23:49, Jonny Grant wrote: Great patch. thanks, Padraig meanwhile further improved it. How about writing signal 9 by the name, ie $ kill -s KILL likewise $ kill -s TERM Where do you mean? Have a nice day, Berny Hi Berny

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-07 Thread Bernhard Voelker
On 2020-06-07 15:34, Pádraig Brady wrote: > [...] it is better to add the comma there [...] thanks, pushed with that change: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/commit/?id=189776ff3b Marking this as done. Have a nice day, Berny

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-07 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 07/06/2020 13:38, Bernhard Voelker wrote: Minor, grammar-related question: +Upon timeout send the TERM signal to COMMAND, if no other SIGNAL specified.\n\ ___^ s/timeout/&,/ ? I stumbled upon this sentence a couple of times - shouldn't there be a comma? The word 'timeout'

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-07 Thread Bernhard Voelker
Hi Padraig, On 2020-06-07 14:13, Pádraig Brady wrote: > How about we add the exit code table to the man page also? > I've adjusted your patch to do that (along with some other tweaks) in the > attached. nice, especially also: > -124 if @var{command} times out > +124 if @var{command} times out,

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-07 Thread Bernhard Voelker
On 2020-06-06 23:49, Jonny Grant wrote: > Great patch. thanks, Padraig meanwhile further improved it. > How about writing signal 9 by the name, ie $ kill -s KILL > likewise $ kill -s TERM Where do you mean? Have a nice day, Berny

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-07 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 06/06/2020 00:37, Bernhard Voelker wrote: On 2020-06-01 10:01, Jonny Grant wrote: My mistake missing that. But could the 137 be listed explicitly? ie. "It may be necessary to use the KILL (9) signal, since this signal cannot be caught, in which case the exit status is 137 (128+9) rather

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-06 Thread Jonny Grant
On 06/06/2020 00:37, Bernhard Voelker wrote: On 2020-06-01 10:01, Jonny Grant wrote: My mistake missing that. But could the 137 be listed explicitly? ie. "It may be necessary to use the KILL (9) signal, since this signal cannot be caught, in which case the exit status is 137 (128+9)

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-05 Thread Bernhard Voelker
On 2020-06-01 10:01, Jonny Grant wrote: > My mistake missing that. But could the 137 be listed explicitly? > ie. > "It may be necessary to use the KILL (9) signal, since this signal cannot > be caught, in which case the exit status is > 137 (128+9) rather than 124." thanks for the

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-01 Thread Jonny Grant
On 01/06/2020 07:53, Andreas Schwab wrote: On Mai 31 2020, Jonny Grant wrote: Could the 124 and 137 be documented on the man page? What's wrong with the last paragraph in the DESCRIPTION section? Andreas. My mistake missing that. But could the 137 be listed explicitly? ie. "It may be

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-06-01 Thread Andreas Schwab
On Mai 31 2020, Jonny Grant wrote: > Could the 124 and 137 be documented on the man page? What's wrong with the last paragraph in the DESCRIPTION section? Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1 "And now for

bug#41634: 'timeout' returning 124 and 133

2020-05-31 Thread Jonny Grant
Hello I'm using timeout with another program that doesn't have a timeout mechanism. Saw surprisingly timeout often returns 124 I was a bit surprised the return code as a signal was not 143 (128+ 15) for SIGTERM. I must be missing something. This article says 124 for SIGTERM, and as expected