Re: [PATCH] t0005: skip signal death exit code test on Windows
Am 6/9/2013 22:31, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Show 10 quoted lines
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
>> I'm a little negative on handling just SIGTERM. That would make the test
>> pass, but does it really address the overall issue? To me, the
>> usefulness is having exit values with consistent meanings.
>
> Yes. Unless the goal is to give Windows port pratically the same
> signal semantics as ports on other platforms, I do not think special
> casing SIGTERM (unless it is a very common signal on Windows and
> others are unlikely to be useful) buys us much.
I'm thinking the same. And, no, SIGTERM is not very common on Windows.
-- Hannes