On 10/22/2012 01:27 PM, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> On Mon Oct 22, 2012 10:20:14AM +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> On 10/21/2012 09:36 PM, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> [...]
>>> I'm thus very interested into seeing timeout --exit-status.
>>
>> Ok cool.
>>
>> It's tempting to support this without an option.
>> I.E. for all commands that exit without WIFSIGNALED being set,
>> i.e. for all commands that catch and exit on signal reception.
>> However that wouldn't work in general I think due to cascading
>> timeout commands or commands that catch signals for cleanup etc.,
>> though I suppose the latter case might be catered for by
>> specifying a specific signal with the -s option.
>
> Yes, I completely agree.  And would only make a difference for programs
> that carry on meaning with their exit code, i.e., where the code depends
> on the computation, as described in my use case.  The default use is
> IMHO just error exit in programs, and most have it implemented this way
> (think of clean-up at signal reception).  Having a default exit code of
> 124 is good for those standard programs.
>
>> So I'll look at adding this new option right after the
>> imminent 8.20 release.
>
> Thank you, this sounds like good news!

Proposed patch is attached.

thanks,
Pádraig.