Hello Chet, Have you had a chance to try this patch? Let me know if you will have any questions.
Thanks, Andrei On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 04:29:13PM -0400, Chet Ramey wrote: > On 5/1/18 7:55 PM, Andrei Vagin wrote: > > >> If it's not obvious, I'm trying to determine whether making this change > >> will add any more value than simply exiting (perhaps with a particular > >> exit status). > > > > It will add more value. Without this changes, we will not know whether a > > bach process crashed or exited. If it will not generate a core dump after > > a crash, the tools like abrtd, coredumpd, etc will not detect this crash > > and will not report about this abnormal behaviour. > > OK, we'll try it. I'll be interested to see if any core dumps created by > causing a SIGSEGV will overwrite any stack information from the `real' > fatal signal. > > Thanks for the patch. > > -- > ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer > ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates > Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU c...@case.edu http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
