On Mon, 27 Feb 2012, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 09:10:04AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
I don't think xargs should work around that bug, particularly not by
introducing unspecified behaviour (the value of WTERMSIG(x) when
!WIFSIGNA
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 09:10:04AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 04:27:35AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> > ...
> >> Utilities are quite broken near here too:
> >> - under -current:
> >>- utilities still don't support signal
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 04:27:35AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
...
Utilities are quite broken near here too:
- under -current:
- utilities still don't support signals >= 32, but give better error
messages.
kill(1) (both /bin/kill and the 9.x/1
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 04:27:35AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> > Log:
> > xargs: If a utility exits with 255 or a signal, write an error message.
> > If a utility called by xargs exits with status 255 or because of a signal,
> > POSIX requires writi
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
Log:
xargs: If a utility exits with 255 or a signal, write an error message.
If a utility called by xargs exits with status 255 or because of a signal,
POSIX requires writing an error message.
Is an exit status of 255 really possible? I thought
Author: jilles
Date: Fri Feb 24 12:35:17 2012
New Revision: 232108
URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/232108
Log:
xargs: If a utility exits with 255 or a signal, write an error message.
If a utility called by xargs exits with status 255 or because of a signal,
POSIX requires writi
