<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - Weston should exit when run on KMS without weston-launch" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60926#c6">Comment # 6</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - Weston should exit when run on KMS without weston-launch" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60926">bug 60926</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:ullysses.a.eoff@intel.com" title="U. Artie Eoff <ullysses.a.eoff@intel.com>"> U. Artie Eoff</a> <pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=60926#c5">comment #5</a>) > > Yes, we have weston permissions as suid root and run it that way. IIRC, the > > reason we initially avoided weston-launch was because it always return an > > exitcode of 0 regardless of how weston exited. This was bad for detecting > > if weston crashed during an automated test. Curiously, I just tried running > > weston-launch again and now I always get a "Hangup" message with exitcode > > 129 regardless of how I kill weston (i.e. SIGTERM, SIGKILL, SIGABRT, > > SIGSEGV). This makes it even more difficult (from a testing perspective) to > > detect "weston as the cause" for test failures. Is there any technical > > reason why weston-launch couldn't exit with weston's exitcode? > > That's a good point - we should do that. Yes, if we did that, then I wouldn't be entirely opposed to resolving this bug as Darxus described. I've added a <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - weston-launch does not handle weston signal exits" href="show_bug.cgi?id=60935">bug 60935</a> for it.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>