Re: wait -n misses signaled subprocess

[Oğuz]

On Monday, January 29, 2024, Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org> wrote:
>
> Anyway... a script writer who has a basic familiarity with wait(2) and
> who reads about "wait -n" will probably assume that wait -n will return
> immediately if a child process has already terminated and hasn't been
> "pseudo-reaped" by a previous "wait" command yet.  If three children
> have terminated, then the next three "wait -n" commands should return
> immediately, and the fourth should block (assuming a fourth child exists).
>

This is the case with me. There is no point in having `wait -n' if it can't
distinguish a single job terminating from multiple jobs terminating between
subsequent calls.


-- 
Oğuz