Thread bump. > On Jan 11, 2018, at 5:51 PM, Nicolas George <geo...@nsup.org> wrote: > > Moritz Barsnick (2018-01-11): >> This patch doesn't change the handling of SIGTERM > > You should have read SIGPIPE, obviously. > >> Is SIGPIPE an interactive signal? > > Of course not. > >> Anything on the other side of output >> file(name) "-" or "pipe:N" may terminate for some reason. > > Yes, that is exactly what SIGPIPE is for. > >> This patch does NOT try to ignore anything. ffmpeg won't keep running >> due to ignoring of SIGPIPE, it will terminate more cleanly due to >> handling it. The former is not desired. (But yes, shall handing to >> enforce ignoring it would allow that.) > > It will terminate less cleanly than if you do the right thing with > SIGPIPE.
This patch has been working for me and ffmpeg terminates cleanly with SIGPIPE with a valid output (moov atom written with mov or cues/seekhead written with mkv). Not sure if I understand well the disadvantage of this patch. Dave Rice _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
