Re: bug in force_interactive handling

[Stas Sergeev]

02.01.2012 22:27, Chet Ramey wrote:
> > In this case it would be nice for bash to have
> > a signal that will move the background process
> > to the foreground.
> But there is already a command to do that: fg.
Sorry, mistyped, I meant the other way around: move
the foreground process to the background, then finish
the script, leaving the process alive.
Will your suggestion about the trap handler work
also for ^Z+bg rather than just fg?

>  could add a process in between, making the job you're interested in

The extra process in-between is a good workaround,
yes, but I wonder if this can be avoided.