Re: [PATCH 1/4] tests: factor portable signal check out of t0005

From: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
Date: Jun 24, 2016, 21:32 UTC
Message-ID: <576DA6FB.1050108@kdbg.org>
In-Reply-To: <20160624210541.GC6282@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Am 24.06.2016 um 23:05 schrieb Jeff King:

Show 8 quoted lines

> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:52:32PM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
>> The Windows behavior is most closely described as having signal(SIGPIPE,
>> SIG_IGN) at the very beginning of the program.
>
> Right, but then we would get EPIPE. So what does git do in such cases?
> I'd expect it generally to either hit the check_pipe() part of
> write_or_die(), or to end up complaining via die() that the write didn't
> go as expected.

Ah, I have forgotten about this code path. Looks like it will trigger exactly the same raise() as test_sigchain. Then the check for exit code 3 makes a bit more sense. But I'm sure we have code paths that do not go through checK_pipe(). Those would proceed through whatever error handling we have and most likely die().

Show 5 quoted lines

>> IMO there is too much danger to trigger a false positive if exit code 3 is
>> treated special in this generality.
>
> Yeah, I agree. But what _should_ it do? E.g., what happens to git-daemon
> when it is killed via TERM?

Frankly, I don't know how bash's 'kill -TERM' and a Windows program interact. I've avoided this topic like the plague so far.

-- Hannes