NetBSD-Bugs archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: bin/46021: xargs should keep still
The following reply was made to PR bin/46021; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc:
Subject: Re: bin/46021: xargs should keep still
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 20:02:37 +0000
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 05:00:07PM +0000, jklowden%schemamania.org@localhost
wrote:
> > % find /usr/include | ./die
> > Segmentation fault
> > % find /usr/include | ./die | cat
> > Segmentation fault
> > % find /usr/include | xargs ./die
> > xargs: ./die terminated by SIGSEGV
> > % find /usr/include | xargs ./die | cat
> > xargs: ./die terminated by SIGSEGV
> > %
> >
> > xargs
> > doesn't print the same message, but it's equivalent and printed in the
> > same circumstances.
>
> No, definitely not. xargs interpreted the signal and printed a message.
> It swallowed the signal, preventing the shell from seeing it.
So your objection is that what you'd like to see is:
% find /usr/include | ./die
Segmentation fault
% find /usr/include | ./die | cat
Segmentation fault
% find /usr/include | xargs ./die
Segmentation fault
% find /usr/include | xargs ./die | cat
Segmentation fault
%
?
But your patch would produce
% find /usr/include | ./die
Segmentation fault
% find /usr/include | ./die | cat
Segmentation fault
% find /usr/include | xargs ./die
% find /usr/include | xargs ./die | cat
%
and this really doesn't make much sense.
> In the last example, xargs littered the terminal via standard
> error, but cat returned normally (or would, if it ever got
> started).
And cat also returns normally in the second case, without xargs. I
don't see what's different.
I don't understand either what you're complaining about or what you're
trying to accomplish.
--
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index |
Old Index