Re: [bug-gawk] Behavior of fflush with SIGPIPE on stdout [PATCH]

[FERRIEUX Alexandre - IMT/OLN]

On 25/03/2017 15:39, Andrew J. Schorr wrote:
> So the SIGPIPE should be visible in the strace output, regardless of the fact
> that gawk is ignoring it, and regardless of the exit status.  I agree that
> exiting with 0 success status is a bit deceptive, but I'm less convinced that
> we need to mirror the untrapped SIGPIPE 141 exit status...

Ah yes, what I do is strace -e trace=exit_group, looking at the exit statuses.
That is a natural method since all signals are not lethal, so looking at them 
in strace output is more complex.
Exit_group is called just once ;-)

In any case, consider the timeline: old gawk gave a 141 due to the absence of any handler; new gawk (for reasons not 
entirely clear to me) decides that default handlers are not good enough and intercepts SIGPIPE. It is trivial to make 
this transparent by writing "exit(128+EPIPE)". What's the point of sticking to a dumb exit(0) or exit(1) ?