From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:21:09 GMT
Subject: Re: Funny: git -p submodule summary
Message-ID: <20090112112109.GA3825@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <496B2278.9050905@viscovery.net>

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:59:04AM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote:

> But we need to insert the patch below *before* 2/4. The test case needs a
> change, too,(exit code on Windows is 3, not 130) but I'll keep that in my
> repository, like with all other Windows related test suite changes.

Hrm. How do you properly detect "killed by SIGINT" on Windows? That is
the intent of that test.

> -#define SIGKILL 0
> -#define SIGCHLD 0
> -#define SIGPIPE 0
> -#define SIGHUP 0
> -#define SIGQUIT 0
> -#define SIGALRM 100
> +#define SIGHUP 1
> +#define SIGQUIT 3
> +#define SIGKILL 9
> +#define SIGPIPE 13
> +#define SIGALRM 14
> +#define SIGCHLD 17

Don't these get fed to signal()? Does Windows really not care about
getting bogus numbers versus 0 (which is, admittedly, bogus itself)? Or
are we just ignoring the return code everywhere?

-Peff