Re: [PATCH] A terminating signal has to complete a bash process

[Eduardo Bustamante]

It's in commit 96b7e26874047647e85bd5c7e71a7f664174c2cc, in the
`devel' branch of the git repository.

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Andrei Vagin <avagin@virtuozzo.com> wrote:
> Hello Chet,
>
> Have you had a chance to try this patch? Let me know if you will have
> any questions.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrei
>
> On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 04:29:13PM -0400, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> On 5/1/18 7:55 PM, Andrei Vagin wrote:
>>
>> >> If it's not obvious, I'm trying to determine whether making this change
>> >> will add any more value than simply exiting (perhaps with a particular
>> >> exit status).
>> >
>> > It will add more value. Without this changes, we will not know whether a
>> > bach process crashed or exited. If it will not generate a core dump after
>> > a crash, the tools like abrtd, coredumpd, etc will not detect this crash
>> > and will not report about this abnormal behaviour.
>>
>> OK, we'll try it. I'll be interested to see if any core dumps created by
>> causing a SIGSEGV will overwrite any stack information from the `real'
>> fatal signal.
>>
>> Thanks for the patch.
>>
>> --
>> ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
>>                ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
>> Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
>