Wait for a command's output to drain before reporting its exit - #4
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
exitfires when a child process dies, not when we have read what it printed, so anything still sitting in the pipe arrived after we had already handled the exit and settled the run. A command that prints and exits straight away could lose its output entirely, which means inline mode could truncate a redirect to a log file. This is what failed the v0.2.0 publish run: the supervisor test settled with zero of three lines.The exit is now held until both pipes close, with a 500ms grace period for the one case where waiting would hang rather than finish, a command that left a grandchild holding stdout so the pipe never closes at all.