On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> It's a race to see whether or not the coprocess exits and is reaped and
> cleaned up before wait executes. `false' is a very short-lived process,
> doesn't require an exec, and so I would expect the child to exit very
> quickly. The cleanup,
On 12/11/12 2:31 PM, DJ Mills wrote:
The first two have been covered in other messages.
>
> 3)
> The first two issues aren't THAT big of a deal, because you can simply not
> worry about coproc's exit status and use wait's.
That's the idea; the coproc command itself returns an indication of
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 12/12/12 3:11 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>
> >> To reproduce:
> >> if ! coproc false; then echo error1 >&2; fi; wait "$COPROC_PID" ||
> echo
> >> error2 >&2
> >
> > This has nothing to do with if but with ! which doesn't appear to work
On 12/12/12 3:11 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> To reproduce:
>> if ! coproc false; then echo error1 >&2; fi; wait "$COPROC_PID" || echo
>> error2 >&2
>
> This has nothing to do with if but with ! which doesn't appear to work
> in this context.
Correct; good catch. It was an oversight and w
On 12/11/12 2:49 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> So, I'd just call it a documentation flaw. Most likely "coproc" is
> indicating whether it successfully created the coprocess (bg job), and
> you'll have to use "wait" to fetch its exit status once it becomes
> available.
More like an omission. The cu
DJ Mills writes:
> 2)
> However, the exception to #1 is my second issue, with is that coproc
> always
> seems to fail when called within the test portion of an if statement. I
> have
> absolutely no idea why this happens.
>
> To reproduce:
> if ! coproc false; then echo error1 >&2; fi
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Since coproc creates a background job, it doesn't really makes sense that
> the "coproc" command itself would know the exit status of the background
> job. It would have to wait for the background job to terminate first,
> which would defea
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 02:31:28PM -0500, DJ Mills wrote:
> First of all, the man page and help output state:
> `The return status of a coprocess is the exit status of command.'
> No matter what, coproc seems to always return true.
>
> To reproduce:
> coproc false || echo error1 >&2;
