Re: SIGINT handling

From	Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu>
Newsgroups	gnu.bash.bug
Subject	Re: SIGINT handling
Date	2015-09-21 15:34 -0400
Message-ID	<mailman.1554.1442864079.19560.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink)
References	<20150918151439.GA16455@chaz.gmail.com> <20150919203628.GA27872@chaz.gmail.com> <20150921094807.GA6229@chaz.gmail.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 9/21/15 5:48 AM, Stephane Chazelas wrote:

> I'm not sure I prefer that WCE approach over WUE. Wouldn't it be
> preferable that applications that intercept SIGINT/QUIT/TSTP for
> anything other than clean-up before exit/suspend implement job
> control themselves instead (like vi's :! should create a process
> group and make that the foreground process group of the
> terminal so pressing ^C in sh -c vi, :!sleep 10, only sends the
> SIGINT to sleep)?

The classic example is emacs remapping the terminal intr key to ^G
and using SIGINT as its internal abort-command signal.

-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
		 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/

Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Re: SIGINT handling Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu> - 2015-09-21 15:34 -0400

csiph-web