From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1881EE8018 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2023 15:53:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244226AbjIHPx3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Sep 2023 11:53:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35698 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S240714AbjIHPx2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Sep 2023 11:53:28 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x42e.google.com (mail-wr1-x42e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DB9ACCA for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2023 08:53:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x42e.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-31ad779e6b3so2135967f8f.2 for ; Fri, 08 Sep 2023 08:53:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1694188402; x=1694793202; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=2SsZrDvPgl5biY5W7sVeMX29tJR/40UylX1fqM5yUsE=; b=bp9NI0cH8lpgf4P9Nd0tCZw9MQkmNBpftLQo3PwD00ol0zORBy274lii4nvWedb/3g vkMnz6uHyTbGT2QP6zkzcloXSmVi7BVUOLGYLVO3iLQxjG4mNRe2Ku281Ggd5zXZycVJ 7H416HQ3BXyEyuzCf3FKhNWLVa5nXOWKKzH/p83HzlPdtqpR08FoW/jy/MGsrDPoyD4c FHNpPGBpvtwX5KBpBSeboi72bvg2WTdOmWJIURyN6lR6qXVl+d6UVNHiLFl8f/5qDWYv VRwuL0dYIxlqIc8V+z4l+7idLqIPWwjZYPXLPLpIJMXYB7JwUyedgdE7khs0OlnhYyC4 COaQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1694188402; x=1694793202; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:date :message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=2SsZrDvPgl5biY5W7sVeMX29tJR/40UylX1fqM5yUsE=; b=XGSxRSiu1ejt/KLyEN4jc1ueJccoJroJ5hAJqMJlAsOaZLrxXZMgDmF31l53gBz+09 R8QVhq6Jxf9oWOa+5DyhQwprAH2iarYgFLQXMxMNUBU66BwX6CN0u1ZAJJ5vhnDuD3IE 8lf3ZaP5I+NNpppoUAoOi1IV7BHGnYywOrbIhQWVfNKIAxdrl1syDDKtP3phPNW7Mf0A RFr5ZUXXkX7ZSjfMe9YX3oAN+hAoOoBYt3qE5JeiijTEU2QDTTrjbgZrKrgK41Kg0eH6 vjpN+CYbBjgTNB0glJ7zovzfm+7cqHcKcdC/N7xZUdb2GEl7hv6gjk5HioqBBxxS++8U 7SvQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw0FvIKYb9hYxrqYC92AbG8oscY9/VFR9qyz8DINmBmuxXhGFv2 x58rkXHGHU08qWnuajH33uAHeDp96gT13Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEfS5W6bAIPyRucn1Ag4eypvT5v3cvUoVz3BF4JE8JDz5EVVTnA7vb2ceghzFinHobxtAmlrQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:e189:0:b0:31a:dc27:dfd with SMTP id az9-20020adfe189000000b0031adc270dfdmr3079751wrb.6.1694188402240; Fri, 08 Sep 2023 08:53:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.212] ([90.242.223.1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b13-20020a5d634d000000b0031c5e9c2ed7sm2399854wrw.92.2023.09.08.08.53.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 08 Sep 2023 08:53:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2023 16:53:21 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Reply-To: phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] start_command: reset disposition of all signals in child Content-Language: en-US To: Junio C Hamano , Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Eric Wong , Phillip Wood References: From: Phillip Wood In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 08/09/2023 16:42, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" writes: > >> [3] This is really a work-around for not moving the child into its own >> process group and changing the foreground process group of the >> controlling terminal. > > I am puzzled, as I somehow thought that "does the user conceive a > subprocess as external and different-from-git entity, or is it > merely an implementation detail? many use of subprocesses in our > codebase, it is the latter." from Peff was a good argument against > such isolation between spawning "git" and spawned subprocesses. It is and in those cases we do not ignore SIGINT and SIGQUIT in the parent when we fork the subprocess. What I was trying to say is that in the few cases where we do ignore SIGINT and SIGQUIT in the parent when we fork a subprocess we're working round the child being in the same process group at the parent. Best Wishes Phillip