-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 297
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
main: Ignore SIGPIPE when printing version #3203
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually wait though, shouldn't we be setting it to
SIG_DFL
here so we get killed by SIGPIPE, which the shell is expecting?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, that's exactly what's happening now. The default disposition for
SIGPIPE
is to kill the process. The process gets killed and the shell sets the exit status to 128 + signum = 141. Thepipefail
feature says that any process with a non-0 exit status is considered failed. I think it would be better if bash saw theSIGPIPE
triggered exit and treated it as a successful exit, but that's not what it does. See https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2017-03/msg00179.html for one of the util-linux maintainers unsuccessfully trying to convince the bash maintainers to do that.By ignoring the signal, the process won't be killed. Instead, all the writes will fail with
EPIPE
, whichg_print
will ignore. That's not so nice since it will keep trying to write data even though there's no reader. However, since theopt_version
output is small and controlled, it's no big deal.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, thanks. So basically there's no way to get strict error handling right now for pipes that works reliably.
Yeah. I think the answer here is to not use shell script...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Exactly. For me it's kinda sad because my entry point to software was elaborate shell scripts to do various things. But after being bitten by one too many of these gotchas I've mostly stopped writing them unless they're very simple.