On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 03:42:54PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > On 05/18/2013 01:11 AM, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: [...] > > What about exit status info? The only way to suppress this kind > > of messages before the patch was -c option. > > That makes sense. > > So, should we remove signal suppression by -qq. > Your opinion?
Current implementation of -qq does not allow suppressing exit status messages without suppressing signal delivery messages, which is not good. So yes, I'm inclined to agree. Maybe -qq is not the right way to control suppressing exit status messages, but what are the alternatives? (ab)using signal number 0 in "-e signal=set" syntax? Adding a new syntax like "-e exit=[01]"? -- ldv
pgpmXaJdAzPep.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_may
_______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
