Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: [Brian May] zsh random behaviour
- X-seq: zsh-workers 21459
- From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Brian May <bam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Brian May] zsh random behaviour
- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 09:38:49 +0000
- Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <sa43bqi6ohp.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <sa4hdf2i0uq.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1050711030705.ZM24700@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <sa43bqi6ohp.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Jul 14, 1:44pm, Brian May wrote:
} Subject: Re: [Brian May] zsh random behaviour
}
} I assume you mean the thread starting at
} <URL:http://www.zsh.org/mla/workers/2005/msg00690.html>.
Yes.
} Or is it a matter that zsh is getting confused when the first process
} returns 255, and aborts because it thinks the program was killed due
} to a signal?
Yes, again.
} Also, there was the comment "...this only effects interactive shells",
} but it my case I first encountered the problem in a shell script.
It extends from interactive shells to processes run by interactive shells.
It depends on zsh's notion of what process is "in the foreground".
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author