From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7330 invoked from network); 21 Jun 1999 16:16:11 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 21 Jun 1999 16:16:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 10044 invoked by alias); 21 Jun 1999 16:16:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 6769 Received: (qmail 10037 invoked from network); 21 Jun 1999 16:16:01 -0000 Message-Id: <9906211547.AA26886@ibmth.df.unipi.it> To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: Small problem with suspend-a-loop patch (6707) In-Reply-To: "Sven Wischnowsky"'s message of "Mon, 21 Jun 1999 13:20:10 DFT." <199906211120.NAA22572@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 17:47:24 +0200 From: Peter Stephenson Sven Wischnowsky wrote: > Bart Schaefer wrote: > > > The first time a loop is suspended and then brought back into the foregroun > d, > > the job status is reported incorrectly; every time thereafter it's correct. > > Oh. there was this explicit test to avoid setting the status of the > last process of a super-job to SP_RUNNING (the last process is the > shell forked for the tail of a pipeline). This has fixed another problem that if you put a foreground process into the background it wasn't reported when it exited. -- Peter Stephenson Tel: +39 050 844536 WWW: http://www.ifh.de/~pws/ Dipartimento di Fisica, Via Buonarroti 2, 56127 Pisa, Italy