They work as expected on Redhat and Debian. "POSIX" leaves open a lot of possibility for less-well-tested systems. They could be writing shellscripts on Minix or HelenOS.
I'm talking about shell implementation not shell usage.
To implement job control, there are several signals you need to be aware of:
- SIGSTSP (what the TTY sends if it receives ^Z)
- SIGSTOP (what a shell sends to a process to suspend it)
- SIGCONT (what a shell sends to a process to resume it)
- SIGCHLD (what the shell needs to listen for to see there is a change in state for a child process -- this is also sometimes referred to as SIGCLD)
- SIGTIN (received if a process read from stdin)
- SIGTOU (received if a process cannot write to stdout nor set its modes)
Some of these signals are received by the shell, some are by the process. Some are sent from the shell and others from the kernel.
SIGCHLD isn't just raised for when a child process goes into suspend, it can be raised for a few different changes of state. So if you receive SIGCHLD you then need to inspect your children (of course you don't know what child has triggered SIGCHLD because signals don't contain metadata) to see if any of them have changed their state in any way. Which is "fun"....
And all of this only works if you manage to fork your children with special flags to set their PGID (not PID, another meta ID which represents what process group they belong to), and send magic syscalls to keep passing ownership of the TTY (if you don't tell the kernel which process owns the TTY, ie is in the foreground, then either your child process and/or your shell will crash due to permission issues).
None of this is 100% portable (see footnote [1]) and all of this also depends on well behaving applications not catching signals themselves and doing something funky with them.
The bug I've got is that Helix editor is one of those applications doing something non-standard with SIGTSTP and assuming anything that breaks as a result is a parent process which doesn't support job control. Except my shell does support job control and still crashes as a result of Helix's non-standard implementation.
In fairness to Helix, my shell does also implement job control in a non-standard way because I wanted to add some wrappers around signals and TTYs to make the terminal experience a little more comfortable than it is with POSIX-compliant shells like Bash. But because job control (and signals and TTYs in general) are so archaic, the result is that there are always going to be edge case bugs with applications (like Helix) that have implemented things a little differently themselves too.
So they're definitely not easy to use and can break in unexpected ways if even just one application doesn't implement things in expected ways.
[1] By the way, this is all ignoring subtle problems that different implementations of PTYs (eg terminal emulators, terminal multiplexors, etc) and different POSIX kernels can introduce too. And those can be a nightmare to track down and debug!
That is way too hostile for a first contact. It would be much better, at first, to politely ask them to comply with the license. If they ignore you, or refuse, then think about escalating.
Based on the commits, PRs, and issue history, they were all previous issues that exists in OasysDB. They changed the name of the contributors to their own.
What is the difference between legitimately taking advantage of open-sourceness and plagiarism? Attribution? If so, try to contact them and ask them to put your name/link to each file derived from yours.
Thank you for the reply. This is my first time having this issue and I'm not quite sure either. I just think that giving credit where credit is due seems more ethical.
I will definitely try to contact them either via the repo issue or their Discord.
> it's also undeniable that as a coordination mechanism the EU has been spectacularly successful.
I get you like the EU, but "spectacularly sucessful" isn't something many people would use. See covid response, and Ukraine war response. I would describe EU's mechanisms as moderately successful, i.e. somewhat better if states did everything on their own and bilaterally.
> The fact that people treat it as a national government is proof of that.
People with triste knowledge of how EU works do that. I do not think having most people in dark about how EU works is "spectacularly successful".
It all depends on what (or when) you’re comparing coordination between European nations to. Having a less than ideal response to COVID or the war in Ukraine is vastly different than the openly hostile relations between European nations experienced prior to the foundation of the CoE/EEC/EU.
> There have been a lot of comments on many Internet forums
Still, the non-improvement in default setting surprised people, e.g. see the embarrasing confession by PCWorld, they did not believe the performance increase is so minuscule and asked AMD if that is for real.
> it certainly is 13%-18% over the corresponding model of the same clock frequency from AMD's previous generation.
More like 10%. And you have to overclock for that. Overclocking has become a fool's errand, you can expect it to cause problems, crashes, etc. Granted, if crashes are rare, gamers may go for it.
Gamer/enthusiast segment expects performance increase, not energy savings. CPU consumption is not even the greatest power hog in gaming PC.
Zen 3 brought 20% more performance at much better power consumption than Zen 2, and this set expectations. Zen 4 was a weaker improvement, and some people hoped that was one time thing, and maybe Zen 5 will get back to Zen 3 level improvements or better. But the improvement is even worse this time.
That's why in this consumer segment, 9700X is like Intel 11gen, a token increase in performance (and sometimes, decrease) as compared to previous gen, and thus a meh product. In other segments, like in desktops for work, or laptops, focus is different, and the same performance at lower consumption is a great new feature. So it's not all bad - it's just meh for gamers and enthusiasts.
Yes, you can overclock, and expect to either win the lottery, or maybe get problems like Intel has. If AMD did not clock these higher by default, there is a good reason for that, and it is not because of green political reasons. AMD has every incentive to clock as high as possible, to look and sell better. Most probably, the current batches of 4nm chips out of TSMC aren't rock-solid at higher clocks.
Re X3D, yes those should be better. But this is marketed as 9700X, not as 9700, so it's a flop. PCWorld was so surprised by the non-improvement that they postponed their review and checked with AMD if their poor bench results really are what AMD intended them to see.
Why? It's cheap, and it's beneficial to some European states/business, and Russians only get some small money for it from Europe. This trade does not seem to harm Ukraine efforts that much, the support given to Ukraine should overcompensate strongly. Ukrainians do not like Europe paying Russia, but they understand that just stopping gas/oil going from Russia to Europe won't help them much, and may antagonize parts of Europe.
According to President Biden this proxy war is the only thing preventing Putin from launching a hitlerian jihad on the entire European continent (source: the most recent presidential debate) so it's a bit odd seeing the Europeans continue to buy his fuel like they don't have any skin in the game. Granted it's also possible that the situation isn't nearly as dire as some would have us believe, but that's the official story so....
I observe this as well, however, because Google wants to catch your attention and keep you for as long as possible, it is quite possible that this is also because of the past view history or terms you search. That is, if in the past, you let play lots of videos from traditional media, or search things traditional media like to talk about, then this may reinforce their appering in the search results.
If you watch videos on space flights and search related terms all the time, I expect you'll get related recommendations and links on less mainstream channels.
I wonder how graphite can create shorts, when all electronics board and components on them can be easily covered with protective nonconducting PCB varnish.
