From unknown Tue Jun 17 22:23:26 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#32521: coreutils timeout in a bash script not transparent for the application Resent-From: "Rafal Jankowski" Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 19:04:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: report 32521 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 32521@debbugs.gnu.org X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.153513743029006 (code B ref -1); Fri, 24 Aug 2018 19:04:02 +0000 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Aug 2018 19:03:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59969 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftHN7-0007Xl-UA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 15:03:50 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54203) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftGgN-0006Ta-Cu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:19:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ftGgH-0001mR-9M for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:19:33 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,XPRIO autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:35699) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ftGgH-0001mE-1d for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:19:33 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46932) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ftGgG-0001b9-3U for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:19:32 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ftGgE-0001kG-S0 for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:19:31 -0400 Received: from dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl ([2001:1a68:a::54]:24498) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ftGgE-0001ih-HN for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 14:19:30 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D2BCC541B3 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:19:36 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at wit.edu.pl Received: from dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 3hjNwLIX5lhP for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:19:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl (mask.wsisiz.edu.pl [IPv6:2001:1a68:a::35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4EC34C541B1 for ; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:19:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 89.78.1.158 (SquirrelMail authenticated user jankowsr) by poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl with HTTP; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:19:27 +0200 Message-ID: <058e59d887bdaf3a0c444505fa499e4e.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:19:27 +0200 From: "Rafal Jankowski" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.22-22.fc28 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 15:03:48 -0400 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.1 (-----) Dear coreutils users/developers https://stackoverflow.com/questions/52008104/coreutils-timeout-in-a-bash-= script-not-transparent-for-the-application I have not done enough investigation to claim this is a true timeout bug but I'm wondering if you could advise on this issue? Regards, Rafa=C5=82 From unknown Tue Jun 17 22:23:26 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#32521: coreutils timeout in a bash script not transparent for the application Resent-From: Paul Eggert Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:05:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 32521 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Rafal Jankowski , 32521@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 32521-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B32521.15351410782110 (code B ref 32521); Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:05:01 +0000 Received: (at 32521) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Aug 2018 20:04:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59999 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftIJy-0000Xy-JS for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:04:38 -0400 Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:54022) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftIJt-0000Xg-Lx for 32521@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:04:35 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AECF1609A0; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:04:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id faok9OJ2b-y6; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:04:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 693B1160E48; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:04:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id wCe8SwL3ALvI; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:04:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.9] (cpe-23-242-74-103.socal.res.rr.com [23.242.74.103]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4842A1609A0; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:04:26 -0700 (PDT) References: <058e59d887bdaf3a0c444505fa499e4e.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> From: Paul Eggert Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <7de205d0-c65a-ecc2-595d-e86bace961f4@cs.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:04:20 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <058e59d887bdaf3a0c444505fa499e4e.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Rafal Jankowski wrote: > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/52008104/coreutils-timeout-in-a-bash-script-not-transparent-for-the-application > > I have not done enough investigation to claim this is a true timeout bug > but I'm wondering if you could advise on this issue? I can't reproduce the bug on Fedora 28. I don't have fabric.api installed, but when my Python program looked like this: #!/usr/bin/python import time time.sleep (20) the output of the script was RETCODE=124 as expected, and when the Python program looked like this: #!/usr/bin/python import time time.sleep (5) the exit status was 0 as expected. Perhaps the problem is within fabric.api. From unknown Tue Jun 17 22:23:26 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#32521: coreutils timeout in a bash script not transparent for the application Resent-From: "Rafal Jankowski" Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:24:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 32521 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 32521@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 32521-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B32521.15351422053801 (code B ref 32521); Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:24:02 +0000 Received: (at 32521) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Aug 2018 20:23:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60010 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftIc9-0000zF-Dj for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:23:25 -0400 Received: from dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl ([213.135.44.54]:35570) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftIc7-0000z5-SL for 32521@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:23:24 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39746C541B6 for <32521@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 22:23:31 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at wit.edu.pl Received: from dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id ETHmUkHNmtMG for <32521@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 22:23:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl (mask.wsisiz.edu.pl [IPv6:2001:1a68:a::35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7C666C541B5 for <32521@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 22:23:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 89.78.1.158 (SquirrelMail authenticated user jankowsr) by poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl with HTTP; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 22:23:21 +0200 Message-ID: <5e0863bf6107ef24b1813565895c5335.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> In-Reply-To: <7de205d0-c65a-ecc2-595d-e86bace961f4@cs.ucla.edu> References: <058e59d887bdaf3a0c444505fa499e4e.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> <7de205d0-c65a-ecc2-595d-e86bace961f4@cs.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 22:23:21 +0200 From: "Rafal Jankowski" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.22-22.fc28 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hi Paul, [...] > I can't reproduce the bug on Fedora 28. I don't have fabric.api installed, > but > when my Python program looked like this: > > #!/usr/bin/python > import time > time.sleep (20) > > the output of the script was RETCODE=124 as expected, and when the Python > program looked like this: > > #!/usr/bin/python > import time > time.sleep (5) > > the exit status was 0 as expected. > > Perhaps the problem is within fabric.api. [...] Content analysis details: (1.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.3 RCVD_IN_RP_RNBL RBL: Relay in RNBL, https://senderscore.org/blacklistlookup/ [213.135.44.54 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com] -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [213.135.44.54 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) Hi Paul, [...] > I can't reproduce the bug on Fedora 28. I don't have fabric.api installed, > but > when my Python program looked like this: > > #!/usr/bin/python > import time > time.sleep (20) > > the output of the script was RETCODE=124 as expected, and when the Python > program looked like this: > > #!/usr/bin/python > import time > time.sleep (5) > > the exit status was 0 as expected. > > Perhaps the problem is within fabric.api. The type of application matters (as I mentioned at the beginning this is not reproducible with fabric 2). So I agree this is somehow specific to fabric.api. However to my understanding timeout should be as transparent as possible for the application that is being executed. So if we can observe that kind of issue with any application I would rather tend to think it's more timeout issue than the app issue. From unknown Tue Jun 17 22:23:26 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#32521: coreutils timeout in a bash script not transparent for the application Resent-From: Paul Eggert Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:59:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 32521 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Rafal Jankowski , 32521@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 32521-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B32521.153514431414503 (code B ref 32521); Fri, 24 Aug 2018 20:59:02 +0000 Received: (at 32521) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Aug 2018 20:58:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60024 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftJA9-0003lq-NW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:58:33 -0400 Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:60268) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftJA7-0003ld-Ug for 32521@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:58:33 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ADD2160E48; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id zJDG19o1Z3Wt; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B28B160EC0; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:58:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id moaQF8E3icxP; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.9] (cpe-23-242-74-103.socal.res.rr.com [23.242.74.103]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3CDBC160E48; Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:58:25 -0700 (PDT) References: <058e59d887bdaf3a0c444505fa499e4e.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> <7de205d0-c65a-ecc2-595d-e86bace961f4@cs.ucla.edu> <5e0863bf6107ef24b1813565895c5335.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> From: Paul Eggert Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <98a8df78-3a3e-bc2b-9fbc-f96bf1c00365@cs.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:58:25 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5e0863bf6107ef24b1813565895c5335.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Rafal Jankowski wrote: > my understanding timeout should be as transparent > as possible for the application that is being executed Sure, but no matter what 'timeout' does, it cannot possibly be transparent to every application, because that application might be using the same mechanism that 'timeout' is using. Until we know more about exactly what the application is up to, it's not clear that this is a bug in 'timeout'. From unknown Tue Jun 17 22:23:26 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#32521: coreutils timeout in a bash script not transparent for the application Resent-From: Rafal Jankowski Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2018 06:15:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 32521 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Paul Eggert Cc: 32521@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 32521-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B32521.15351776688826 (code B ref 32521); Sat, 25 Aug 2018 06:15:02 +0000 Received: (at 32521) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Aug 2018 06:14:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60152 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftRq8-0002II-MH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 02:14:28 -0400 Received: from dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl ([213.135.44.54]:44552) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftRq6-0002I9-Bv for 32521@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 02:14:26 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E3FC541A2; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 08:14:27 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at wit.edu.pl Received: from dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id OToxliCX40ic; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 08:14:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from oceanic.wsisiz.edu.pl (oceanic.wsisiz.edu.pl [IPv6:2001:1a68:a::33]) by dervish.wsisiz.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C3D9C54193; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 08:14:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by oceanic.wsisiz.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id D62432C0E1D; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 08:14:23 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at wit.edu.pl Received: from oceanic.wsisiz.edu.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (oceanic.wsisiz.edu.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id oh3EwFTuncVV; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 08:14:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: by oceanic.wsisiz.edu.pl (Postfix, from userid 6054) id D87822C10C8; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 08:14:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by oceanic.wsisiz.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFD552C0E1D; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 08:14:22 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2018 08:14:22 +0200 (CEST) From: Rafal Jankowski In-Reply-To: <98a8df78-3a3e-bc2b-9fbc-f96bf1c00365@cs.ucla.edu> Message-ID: References: <058e59d887bdaf3a0c444505fa499e4e.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> <7de205d0-c65a-ecc2-595d-e86bace961f4@cs.ucla.edu> <5e0863bf6107ef24b1813565895c5335.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> <98a8df78-3a3e-bc2b-9fbc-f96bf1c00365@cs.ucla.edu> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LFD 202 2017-01-01) Organization: Mafia Pruszkowska MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, Paul Eggert wrote: > Sure, but no matter what 'timeout' does, it cannot possibly be transparent to > every application, because that application might be using the same mechanism > that 'timeout' is using. Until we know more about exactly what the > application is up to, it's not clear that this is a bug in 'timeout'. [...] Content analysis details: (1.3 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.3 RCVD_IN_RP_RNBL RBL: Relay in RNBL, https://senderscore.org/blacklistlookup/ [213.135.44.54 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com] -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [213.135.44.54 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, Paul Eggert wrote: > Sure, but no matter what 'timeout' does, it cannot possibly be transparent to > every application, because that application might be using the same mechanism > that 'timeout' is using. Until we know more about exactly what the > application is up to, it's not clear that this is a bug in 'timeout'. Ah, OK. I noticed a note in the 'info timeout' regarding special utilities that may not work with timeout. So that may be a similar case. If it's not too much effort could you please briefly explain or point to existing documentation what kind of mechanism can cause any kind of misbehaviour for the application? Also what is quite eye-spotting to me is the fact that: timeout [time] app #works fine app invoked from the bash script # works fine timeout [time] app invoked from the bash script # does not work From unknown Tue Jun 17 22:23:26 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#32521: coreutils timeout in a bash script not transparent for the application Resent-From: Paul Eggert Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2018 07:09:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 32521 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Rafal Jankowski Cc: 32521@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 32521-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B32521.153518090021433 (code B ref 32521); Sat, 25 Aug 2018 07:09:02 +0000 Received: (at 32521) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Aug 2018 07:08:20 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60193 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftSgF-0005Zd-Vc for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 03:08:20 -0400 Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:51640) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ftSgE-0005ZR-Rg for 32521@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 03:08:19 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id F058E160778; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 00:08:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id Zn3C1qukRNDI; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 00:08:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AEF4160EF0; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 00:08:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id ePVB9RHP4U_y; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 00:08:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.9] (cpe-23-242-74-103.socal.res.rr.com [23.242.74.103]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 254E5160778; Sat, 25 Aug 2018 00:08:12 -0700 (PDT) References: <058e59d887bdaf3a0c444505fa499e4e.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> <7de205d0-c65a-ecc2-595d-e86bace961f4@cs.ucla.edu> <5e0863bf6107ef24b1813565895c5335.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> <98a8df78-3a3e-bc2b-9fbc-f96bf1c00365@cs.ucla.edu> From: Paul Eggert Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2018 00:08:11 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Rafal Jankowski wrote: > If it's not too much effort could you please briefly explain or point to > existing documentation what kind of mechanism can cause any kind of misbehaviour > for the application? Sorry, don't know. You'll have to look at the source code, I expect. Or try running 'strace -f' for hints. From unknown Tue Jun 17 22:23:26 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#32521: coreutils timeout in a bash script not transparent for the application Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?P=C3=A1draig?= Brady Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 12:23:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 32521 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Rafal Jankowski , 32521@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 32521-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B32521.15353725474460 (code B ref 32521); Mon, 27 Aug 2018 12:23:02 +0000 Received: (at 32521) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Aug 2018 12:22:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33656 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fuGXL-00019r-Jh for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 08:22:27 -0400 Received: from mail.magicbluesmoke.com ([82.195.144.49]:50378) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fuGXJ-00019e-8b; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 08:22:25 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [76.21.115.186]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.magicbluesmoke.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 117E8AD95; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 20:54:32 +0100 (IST) References: <058e59d887bdaf3a0c444505fa499e4e.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> From: =?UTF-8?Q?P=C3=A1draig?= Brady Message-ID: <2c801bc6-c671-3db3-23e0-97814d042acc@draigBrady.com> Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:54:30 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <058e59d887bdaf3a0c444505fa499e4e.squirrel@poczta.wsisiz.edu.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) tag 32521 notabug close 32521 stop On 24/08/18 11:19, Rafal Jankowski wrote: > Dear coreutils users/developers > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/52008104/coreutils-timeout-in-a-bash-script-not-transparent-for-the-application > > I have not done enough investigation to claim this is a true timeout bug > but I'm wondering if you could advise on this issue? It seems that both timeout(1) and fabric are acting as monitors, and fabric < 2 is not general enough to handle that. You could simplify some of timeout's monitoring duties, so that it runs more like a normal command by using the --foreground option. Given this is not an issue with Fabric 2, I'm closing this for now. cheers, Pádraig