2021年2月12日(金) 4:27 Chet Ramey <chet.ra...@case.edu>: > > Thank you. Yes, if there is a simpler but still robust and reliable > > way to do it, that would be nice. > > There is, in fact, a simpler way for this case. Blocking SIGCHLD around the > calls to zread and its siblings fixes the problem. It might not be enough > of a general solution for you, though.
Thank you for the fix. Now I see why this particular form (CMD & read -t) < XXX caused a significantly large timeout-failure rate. But, I guess the failure rate is almost zero but not exactly zero even after this fix. As I have already written, as far as the probability is non-zero, I'm afraid of a situation that another unexpected usage might cause another relatively large failure rate... Besides, I'm actually afraid of problems with very small probability more than the ones with a large probability because they are hard to debug. -- Koichi
