Following is C code that is destined to crash:
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
int main() {
char *p = NULL;
printf("Value at P: %c\n", *p);
return 0;
}
When I compile and run it (RH4 machine with gcc 4.5.2), it predictably gives a segmentation fault:
% ./a.out
Segmentation fault
% echo $status
139
If I run it with Perl v5.8.5, this happens:
% perl -e 'system("./a.out") and die "Status: $?"'
Status: 11 at -e line 1.
The perlvar documentation for $?
says that
Thus, the exit value of the subprocess is really
($?>> 8 )
, and$? & 127
gives which signal, if any, the process died from, and$? & 128
reports whether there was a core dump.
11 >> 8
is 0
, and 11 & 127
is 11
.
Why the different exit statuses? If we cannot depend on the exit status, what should be the way to detect segmentation fault in an external command?
A segmentation fault (aka segfault) is a common condition that causes programs to crash; they are often associated with a file named core . Segfaults are caused by a program trying to read or write an illegal memory location.
It can be resolved by having a base condition to return from the recursive function. A pointer must point to valid memory before accessing it.
Reading the documentation for system
might answer your question:
system('a.out');
if ($? == -1) {
print "failed to execute: $!\n";
}
elsif ($? & 127) {
printf "child died with signal %d, %s coredump\n",
($? & 127), ($? & 128) ? 'with' : 'without';
}
else {
printf "child exited with value %d\n", $? >> 8;
}
Output:
child died with signal 11, without coredump
The shell just encodes the signal in the status in a different way: 139 - 128 = 11. For example, man bash
says:
The return value of a simple command is its exit status, or 128+n if the command is terminated by signal n.
The OS always sees the same thing... what is returned by the wait(2) family of functions. system(3), et. all, call wait(2). How it peculates up you is what is causing the differences. The shell and the programs do different things and report different ways. Having to shift right 8 to get the most common exit status would be very annoying in shell programs and confuse less tech savvy users.
While the very first UNIX systems I used (genuine Unix) had the same returns I have always wondered if pre-release versions were different and returning the signal and core/dump were a later addition.
My preferred reporting of exit status tends to have the computer split my bits for me.
my $x = $?; #save status print( "Exit status: %d.%d%s\n", $x>>8, $x&127, ($x&128)?"*":"" );
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With