Ttdfjt

Sense of humor in your sci-fi stories

Can you create a free-floating MASYU puzzle?

Interpretation of non-significant results as "trends"

What was the nature of the known bugs in the Space Shuttle software?

How to deal with account scam and fraud?

What's the difference between a type and a kind?

Attach a visible light telescope to the outside of the ISS

Users forgotting to regenerate PDF before sending it

Gory anime with pink haired girl escaping an asylum

How can I review my manager, who is fine?

Passwordless authentication - how and when to invalidate a login code

NOLOCK or Read Uncommitted locking / latching behaviours

What is the highest level of accuracy in motion control a Victorian society could achieve?

How to understand flavors and when to use combination of them?

Diagram with cylinder shapes and rectangles

What is the shape of the upper boundary of water hitting a screen?

Function that detects repetitions

Shipped package arrived - didn't order, possible scam?

Why did Robert F. Kennedy loathe Lyndon B. Johnson?

As a supervisor, what feedback would you expect from a PhD who quits?

What purpose does mercury dichloride have in fireworks?

How to reclaim personal item I've lent to the office without burning bridges?

Taking my Ph.D. advisor out for dinner after graduation

What is this burst transmission sequence across the entire band?

How to handle async subshell exit

exit shell script from a subshellRunning a “scheduled”/delayed script as sudo on server, via ssh - and right before ssh exitWhere is `exit` defined?How to run subshell commands over SSH?Wait for foreground process to emit string, then send to backgroundSSH connections running in the background don't exit if multiple connections have been started by the same shellHow to Group Commands After '&&' or '||' Branch and Not Invoke Subshell Variable Restriction?Bash find if all env variables are declared, by variable namegrabbing exit code of background process/subshellBackground process of subshell strange behaviour

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;

5

Say I have this:

set -e;

(
 docker stop notifier-server
 docker rm -f notifier-server
 exit 1 # explicitly exit with non-zero
) &

wait;

echo 'we are here now'

will we always get to the echo line, even if the subshell exits with non-zero? I assume so, since it's a backend process/subshell?

What's the right way to look at this?

bash shell background-process subshell

share|improve this question

asked Jun 27 at 20:38

zambiazzzzambiazzz

2611 bronze badge

add a comment | 

5

Say I have this:

set -e;

(
 docker stop notifier-server
 docker rm -f notifier-server
 exit 1 # explicitly exit with non-zero
) &

wait;

echo 'we are here now'

will we always get to the echo line, even if the subshell exits with non-zero? I assume so, since it's a backend process/subshell?

What's the right way to look at this?

bash shell background-process subshell

share|improve this question

asked Jun 27 at 20:38

zambiazzzzambiazzz

2611 bronze badge

add a comment | 

Say I have this:

set -e;

(
 docker stop notifier-server
 docker rm -f notifier-server
 exit 1 # explicitly exit with non-zero
) &

wait;

echo 'we are here now'

will we always get to the echo line, even if the subshell exits with non-zero? I assume so, since it's a backend process/subshell?

What's the right way to look at this?

bash shell background-process subshell

share|improve this question

asked Jun 27 at 20:38

zambiazzzzambiazzz

2611 bronze badge

set -e;

(
 docker stop notifier-server
 docker rm -f notifier-server
 exit 1 # explicitly exit with non-zero
) &

wait;

echo 'we are here now'

share|improve this question

asked Jun 27 at 20:38

zambiazzzzambiazzz

2611 bronze badge

share|improve this question

asked Jun 27 at 20:38

zambiazzzzambiazzz

2611 bronze badge

asked Jun 27 at 20:38

zambiazzzzambiazzz

2611 bronze badge

asked Jun 27 at 20:38

zambiazzzzambiazzz

2611 bronze badge

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

3

It is not related to the process being a background process, it is related to the exit status of the wait command.

From help wait:

If ID is not given, waits for all currently active child processes, and the return status is zero.

$ bash -exc '(sleep 1; exit 1) & wait ; echo done'
+ wait
+ sleep 1
+ exit 1
+ echo done
done

If the -n option is supplied, waits for the next job to terminate and returns its exit status.

$ bash -exc '(sleep 1; exit 1) & wait -n; echo $?:done'
+ wait -n
+ sleep 1
+ exit 1

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 27 at 20:55

RalfFriedlRalfFriedl

5,91033 gold badges1212 silver badges2626 bronze badges

add a comment | 

2

Your code would not terminate the current shell session since no non-zero exit status is returned to it. The result in the calling shell of starting a background job is always zero.

Would you have used wait "$!" or wait -n ("wait for next job to finish"), then the shell session would have terminated since wait would have returned the exit status of the job that it waited for, which is non-zero.

See help wait in bash.

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 27 at 20:53

Kusalananda♦Kusalananda

154k1818 gold badges304304 silver badges488488 bronze badges

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f527352%2fhow-to-handle-async-subshell-exit%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

3

It is not related to the process being a background process, it is related to the exit status of the wait command.

From help wait:

If ID is not given, waits for all currently active child processes, and the return status is zero.

$ bash -exc '(sleep 1; exit 1) & wait ; echo done'
+ wait
+ sleep 1
+ exit 1
+ echo done
done

If the -n option is supplied, waits for the next job to terminate and returns its exit status.

$ bash -exc '(sleep 1; exit 1) & wait -n; echo $?:done'
+ wait -n
+ sleep 1
+ exit 1

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 27 at 20:55

RalfFriedlRalfFriedl

5,91033 gold badges1212 silver badges2626 bronze badges

add a comment | 

3

It is not related to the process being a background process, it is related to the exit status of the wait command.

From help wait:

If ID is not given, waits for all currently active child processes, and the return status is zero.

$ bash -exc '(sleep 1; exit 1) & wait ; echo done'
+ wait
+ sleep 1
+ exit 1
+ echo done
done

If the -n option is supplied, waits for the next job to terminate and returns its exit status.

$ bash -exc '(sleep 1; exit 1) & wait -n; echo $?:done'
+ wait -n
+ sleep 1
+ exit 1

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 27 at 20:55

RalfFriedlRalfFriedl

5,91033 gold badges1212 silver badges2626 bronze badges

add a comment | 

It is not related to the process being a background process, it is related to the exit status of the wait command.

From help wait:

If ID is not given, waits for all currently active child processes, and the return status is zero.

$ bash -exc '(sleep 1; exit 1) & wait ; echo done'
+ wait
+ sleep 1
+ exit 1
+ echo done
done

If the -n option is supplied, waits for the next job to terminate and returns its exit status.

$ bash -exc '(sleep 1; exit 1) & wait -n; echo $?:done'
+ wait -n
+ sleep 1
+ exit 1

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 27 at 20:55

RalfFriedlRalfFriedl

5,91033 gold badges1212 silver badges2626 bronze badges

$ bash -exc '(sleep 1; exit 1) & wait ; echo done'
+ wait
+ sleep 1
+ exit 1
+ echo done
done

$ bash -exc '(sleep 1; exit 1) & wait -n; echo $?:done'
+ wait -n
+ sleep 1
+ exit 1

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 27 at 20:55

RalfFriedlRalfFriedl

5,91033 gold badges1212 silver badges2626 bronze badges

answered Jun 27 at 20:55

RalfFriedlRalfFriedl

5,91033 gold badges1212 silver badges2626 bronze badges

answered Jun 27 at 20:55

RalfFriedlRalfFriedl

5,91033 gold badges1212 silver badges2626 bronze badges

2

Your code would not terminate the current shell session since no non-zero exit status is returned to it. The result in the calling shell of starting a background job is always zero.

Would you have used wait "$!" or wait -n ("wait for next job to finish"), then the shell session would have terminated since wait would have returned the exit status of the job that it waited for, which is non-zero.

See help wait in bash.

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 27 at 20:53

Kusalananda♦Kusalananda

154k1818 gold badges304304 silver badges488488 bronze badges

add a comment | 

2

Your code would not terminate the current shell session since no non-zero exit status is returned to it. The result in the calling shell of starting a background job is always zero.

Would you have used wait "$!" or wait -n ("wait for next job to finish"), then the shell session would have terminated since wait would have returned the exit status of the job that it waited for, which is non-zero.

See help wait in bash.

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 27 at 20:53

Kusalananda♦Kusalananda

154k1818 gold badges304304 silver badges488488 bronze badges

add a comment | 

Your code would not terminate the current shell session since no non-zero exit status is returned to it. The result in the calling shell of starting a background job is always zero.

Would you have used wait "$!" or wait -n ("wait for next job to finish"), then the shell session would have terminated since wait would have returned the exit status of the job that it waited for, which is non-zero.

See help wait in bash.

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 27 at 20:53

Kusalananda♦Kusalananda

154k1818 gold badges304304 silver badges488488 bronze badges

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 27 at 20:53

Kusalananda♦Kusalananda

154k1818 gold badges304304 silver badges488488 bronze badges

answered Jun 27 at 20:53

Kusalananda♦Kusalananda

154k1818 gold badges304304 silver badges488488 bronze badges

answered Jun 27 at 20:53

Kusalananda♦Kusalananda

154k1818 gold badges304304 silver badges488488 bronze badges