Follow-up Comment #3, bug #20891 (project findutils):
Why this is waiting from 2007y ? it is 6 years!
This is strongly recommended improove exit codes. Unfortunately we chould save
old beavior. What is my opinion:
1. add another option for switch on new exit code table
2. for exitcodes 0 to 123, xargs should check the biggest one from execution
and return this
3. code 255 should be routed as is without mapping to 144. this is unneeded.
who use them?
4. exitcode 1, unusable at now. map this to 124.
and should be add another option, when command returns any 'disaster' exits,
script programmer could decide break or continue xargs execution.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?20891>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
