I think it is fair to say now that question about ksh93 should be directed as issues to https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_att_ast&d=DwIFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=xAmMDCZ2-8GzvOGVQ4JNytGtSvYfbcWh1NmETt0f950&m=h2-MigarEvN2r2UwdifJTmwcySbxlyFeeTqqUVAZo0A&s=gW7cr036OxT6ysbi7b3zGzUYQUnk0gXJRrqjp69TUKo&e= . Any other comments? Very little traffic here now.
Regards Pete On 30 May 2017 at 16:56, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a ksh user that relied on previous behaviour of ksh (not posix) > functions trap handling. > > The change in question is src/cmd/ksh93/sh/xec.c:sh_funscope() > that now only "forwards" a signal for SIGINT and SIGQUIT. > > if (r>SH_EXITSIG && ((r&SH_EXITMASK)==SIGINT || > r&SH_EXITMASK)==SIGQUIT) > kill(getpid(),r&SH_EXIMASK); > > previously it would call sh_fault() on any signal. > > I see the patch is explicit, but I fail to understand the reason of the > behavior change, e.g. if executing nested non posix functions, and > a non posix function traps signals, it now may ignore signals that by > default would have terminated the script/execution. > > One example is the attached script. Note that fixing the test case > is trivial. The issue is the user relying on previous behavior. > > Thanks, > Paulo > > _______________________________________________ > ast-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-users > >
_______________________________________________ ast-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-users
