Re: SIGINT handling

[Chet Ramey]

On 9/21/15 5:24 PM, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> 2015-09-21 15:34:28 -0400, Chet Ramey:
>> On 9/21/15 5:48 AM, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure I prefer that WCE approach over WUE. Wouldn't it be
>>> preferable that applications that intercept SIGINT/QUIT/TSTP for
>>> anything other than clean-up before exit/suspend implement job
>>> control themselves instead (like vi's :! should create a process
>>> group and make that the foreground process group of the
>>> terminal so pressing ^C in sh -c vi, :!sleep 10, only sends the
>>> SIGINT to sleep)?
>>
>> The classic example is emacs remapping the terminal intr key to ^G
>> and using SIGINT as its internal abort-command signal.
> [...]
> 
> AFAICT emacs starts a new process group (and makes it the
> foreground process group).

Maybe, if it's being run from an interactive shell or in a separate
X window.  On the other hand, run this script with `dash':

echo before
emacs -nw /tmp/qux
echo after

If you use ^G to abort an editing command in emacs, you won't see `after'
displayed and the script will exit with status 130, even though emacs
clearly doesn't die due to SIGINT.

-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/