On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 11:50 AM Chet Ramey <chet.ra...@case.edu> wrote: > > The short story is that `wait -n' now returns the status of any process > that's completed and hasn't been waited for yet, just like `wait'. It's > not restricted to processes that terminates after it's invoked. It does > this even when it's given a list of pid or job arguments, which is > where the problem here arises. That's probably not what I intended with > the change in the first place, but it was a fast-moving target.
I was a pretty big part of that discussion, and this looks broken to me. If 'wait -n' is passed a list of pids, it shouldn't also be waiting for other background processes that weren't passed to it as arguments. Is that what you're saying it's doing?
