From madcityzen@gmail.com

This patch changes an example call to a function named "sig" into a call to "kill".

From madcityzen@gmail.com

From cdcdf579bb6bd321584a63809995c5980218478b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Doug Bell <madcityzen@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 03:02:56 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] sig() should be kill()

There is no sig() function, and the block of text has similar language
to a previous block which uses kill()
---
 pod/perlfork.pod | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/pod/perlfork.pod b/pod/perlfork.pod
index 7729444..fed58f3 100644
--- a/pod/perlfork.pod
+++ b/pod/perlfork.pod
@@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ pseudo-child created by it that is also a pseudo-parent will only exit
 after their pseudo-children have exited.
 
 Starting with Perl 5.14 a parent will not wait() automatically
-for any child that has been signalled with C<sig('TERM', ...)>
+for any child that has been signalled with C<kill('TERM', ...)>
 to avoid a deadlock in case the child is blocking on I/O and
 never receives the signal.
 
-- 
2.0.0

From madcityzen@gmail.com

Doug Bell
madcityzen@​gmail.com

From @jkeenan

On Sun Aug 31 01​:09​:18 2014, madcityzen@​gmail.com wrote​:

This patch changes an example call to a function named "sig" into a
call to "kill".

Applied to blead in commit 9589aa8

(but bcc-ing the author of this part of the documentation as a double-check).

I believe this correction is eligible for back-port to 5.18 and application to 5.20.1. Correct?

Thank you very much.
Jim Keenan

The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'

From @rjbs

* James E Keenan via RT <perlbug-followup@​perl.org> [2014-08-31T09​:36​:34]

Applied to blead in commit 9589aa8

(but bcc-ing the author of this part of the documentation as a double-check).

I believe this correction is eligible for back-port to 5.18 and application
to 5.20.1. Correct?

Correct.

--
rjbs

From @jkeenan

On Mon Sep 01 19​:58​:56 2014, perl.p5p@​rjbs.manxome.org wrote​:

* James E Keenan via RT <perlbug-followup@​perl.org> [2014-08-
31T09​:36​:34]

Applied to blead in commit 9589aa8

(but bcc-ing the author of this part of the documentation as a
double-check).

I believe this correction is eligible for back-port to 5.18 and
application
to 5.20.1. Correct?

Correct.

rjbs​:

I would like to close this ticket, as the issue has been resolved in blead. But what exactly is the procedure for backporting the correction? I observe that the correction does not yet appear in pod/perlfork.pod in either maint-5.18 or maint-5.20. Should I close the ticket anyway (and assume that the Release Managers for those branches will handle the backporting)?

Thank you very much.

--
James E Keenan (jkeenan@​cpan.org)

From @jkeenan

On Sun Sep 14 03​:52​:53 2014, jkeenan wrote​:

On Mon Sep 01 19​:58​:56 2014, perl.p5p@​rjbs.manxome.org wrote​:

* James E Keenan via RT <perlbug-followup@​perl.org> [2014-08-
31T09​:36​:34]

Applied to blead in commit 9589aa8

(but bcc-ing the author of this part of the documentation as a
double-check).

I believe this correction is eligible for back-port to 5.18 and
application
to 5.20.1. Correct?

Correct.

rjbs​:

I would like to close this ticket, as the issue has been resolved in
blead. But what exactly is the procedure for backporting the
correction? I observe that the correction does not yet appear in
pod/perlfork.pod in either maint-5.18 or maint-5.20. Should I close
the ticket anyway (and assume that the Release Managers for those
branches will handle the backporting)?

Thank you very much.

I cherry-picked this commit to maint-5.18 and to maint-5.20. Unfortunately, I didn't do it until after 5.20.1 was out the door.

Assuming there are no complaints about my first-ever use of 'git-cherry-pick', I will close this ticket in a couple of days.

Thank you very much.
Jim Keenan

--
James E Keenan (jkeenan@​cpan.org)

From @steve-m-hay

On 19 September 2014 03​:26, James E Keenan via RT
<perlbug-followup@​perl.org> wrote​:

On Sun Sep 14 03​:52​:53 2014, jkeenan wrote​:

On Mon Sep 01 19​:58​:56 2014, perl.p5p@​rjbs.manxome.org wrote​:

* James E Keenan via RT <perlbug-followup@​perl.org> [2014-08-
31T09​:36​:34]

Applied to blead in commit 9589aa8

(but bcc-ing the author of this part of the documentation as a
double-check).

I believe this correction is eligible for back-port to 5.18 and
application
to 5.20.1. Correct?

Correct.

rjbs​:

I would like to close this ticket, as the issue has been resolved in
blead. But what exactly is the procedure for backporting the
correction? I observe that the correction does not yet appear in
pod/perlfork.pod in either maint-5.18 or maint-5.20. Should I close
the ticket anyway (and assume that the Release Managers for those
branches will handle the backporting)?

Thank you very much.

I cherry-picked this commit to maint-5.18 and to maint-5.20. Unfortunately, I didn't do it until after 5.20.1 was out the door.

Assuming there are no complaints about my first-ever use of 'git-cherry-pick', I will close this ticket in a couple of days.

I saw this change mentioned and voted on by at least one committer
late in the 5.20.1 release process, but had already drawn a line under
what to include. At least one RC had been released and I didn't want
to go pulling in anything more than was strictly necessary. I had
intended to get it in 5.20.2 (along with many, many other changes...)
but hadn't got round to it yet. Your cherry-pick on maint-5.20 looks
fine to me, although I don't recall whether it had actually got the
requisite number of votes (although it's such a minor change that in
this case it hardly matters).

Personally, I wouldn't have cherry-picked it into maint-5.18 right
now​: RJBS is in the process of releasing 5.18.3 so in general it
should be left to him what to add to the RC1 before final release.

From @jkeenan

On Fri Sep 19 00​:24​:22 2014, shay wrote​:

On 19 September 2014 03​:26, James E Keenan via RT
<perlbug-followup@​perl.org> wrote​:

On Sun Sep 14 03​:52​:53 2014, jkeenan wrote​:

On Mon Sep 01 19​:58​:56 2014, perl.p5p@​rjbs.manxome.org wrote​:

* James E Keenan via RT <perlbug-followup@​perl.org> [2014-08-
31T09​:36​:34]

Applied to blead in commit
9589aa8

(but bcc-ing the author of this part of the documentation as a
double-check).

I believe this correction is eligible for back-port to 5.18 and
application
to 5.20.1. Correct?

Correct.

rjbs​:

I would like to close this ticket, as the issue has been resolved in
blead. But what exactly is the procedure for backporting the
correction? I observe that the correction does not yet appear in
pod/perlfork.pod in either maint-5.18 or maint-5.20. Should I close
the ticket anyway (and assume that the Release Managers for those
branches will handle the backporting)?

Thank you very much.

I cherry-picked this commit to maint-5.18 and to maint-5.20.
Unfortunately, I didn't do it until after 5.20.1 was out the door.

Assuming there are no complaints about my first-ever use of 'git-
cherry-pick', I will close this ticket in a couple of days.

I saw this change mentioned and voted on by at least one committer
late in the 5.20.1 release process, but had already drawn a line under
what to include. At least one RC had been released and I didn't want
to go pulling in anything more than was strictly necessary. I had
intended to get it in 5.20.2 (along with many, many other changes...)
but hadn't got round to it yet. Your cherry-pick on maint-5.20 looks
fine to me, although I don't recall whether it had actually got the
requisite number of votes (although it's such a minor change that in
this case it hardly matters).

Personally, I wouldn't have cherry-picked it into maint-5.18 right
now​: RJBS is in the process of releasing 5.18.3 so in general it
should be left to him what to add to the RC1 before final release.

I admit to being confused about the cherry-picking procedures and apologize for the confusion. I was mainly focused on getting this ticket closed and didn't know whether simply posting a message in this ticket would suffice for getting the change backported.

I'm also confused about the relationship between the RT tickets which get opened for various maintenance releases (titled like "Tickets blocking perl.5.XX.Y") and the p5p mailing list threads about commits for cherry-picking.

Also, there are subtle differences in emphasis between pod/perlpolicy.pod and pod/perlgit.pod in locations around the string "cherry-pick."

Thank you very much.
Jim Keenan
--
James E Keenan (jkeenan@​cpan.org)

@jkeenan - Status changed from 'open' to 'resolved'