Re: bug in force_interactive handling

[Stas Sergeev]

03.01.2012 00:07, Chet Ramey wrote:
> > I tried:
> > ---
> > trap bg USR1
> > ---
> > Now if I first send SIGSTOP to the job and then SIGUSR1 to
> > bash, that works.
> > Is it possible to avoid sending SIGSTOP to the job, and make
> > the trap handler to do both things at once? Not that it is strictly
> > required since you already described a few other ways, but I wonder. :)
> Well, this is getting pretty esoteric.  On one hand, you can avoid the
> entire SIGSTOP/SIGCONT issue by initially starting the job in the
> background with `&'.  On the other, if you want to move a foreground
> job to the background, you have to get it to give up control somehow, and
> sending it a signal is the way to do that.
Hello Chet, I double-checked that, and with the attached
quick hack I was able to do:
trap bg USR1
and move the job to the background with just that SIGUSR1.
Do you think such a feature is worth being implemented?
If yes, feel free to give me the suggestions and I'll try to
implement it properly. The attached patch is just a POC of
course, it is entirely incorrect.

jobs.c.diff
Description: Text document