# Workaround for 1.8.6 with CommandLine **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [March 30, 2007, 3:52pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/workaround-for-1-8-6-with-commandline/90631 "2007-03-30T15:52:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecc23a/32.png) [@sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/sauy7)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2007, 3:52pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/workaround-for-1-8-6-with-commandline/90631/1 "2007-03-30T15:52:37Z")
Hello If you are using ruby-1.8.6, you may have noticed a bug where exit always returns 0 when called from within an at\_exit block. You can test this on your machine with the following little snippet: ruby -e ‘at\_exit { exit(1) }’ ; echo $? The result should be ‘1’, but ruby-1.8.6 will return ‘0’. To workaround this when using commandline, you can change an application that reads like: require ‘rubygems’ require ‘commandline’ class App \< CommandLine::Application end to require ‘rubygems’ require ‘commandline’ class App \< CommandLine::Application\_wo\_AutoRun end App.run This will not use the at\_exit technique of self launching the app and give the correct exit code. Jim ---
**Author:** ![sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecc23a/32.png) [@sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/sauy7)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2007, 4:51pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/workaround-for-1-8-6-with-commandline/90631/2 "2007-03-30T16:51:48Z")
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Jim F. wrote: > Hello > > If you are using ruby-1.8.6, you may have noticed a bug where exit always > returns 0 when called from within an at\_exit block. You can test this on your > machine with the following little snippet: > > ruby -e ‘at\_exit { exit(1) }’ ; echo $? > > The result should be ‘1’, but ruby-1.8.6 will return ‘0’. wow. i rely on that combination in a few places, in particular i dis-inherit exit handlers in child processes by doing this as the first line at\_exit{ exit! status } do you know if it’s a bug or new behaviour? -a ---
**Author:** ![sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecc23a/32.png) [@sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/sauy7)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2007, 5:33pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/workaround-for-1-8-6-with-commandline/90631/3 "2007-03-30T17:33:55Z")
On 3/30/07, removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Jim F. wrote: > > wow. i rely on that combination in a few places, in particular i dis-inherit > exit > handlers in child processes by doing this as the first line > > at\_exit{ exit! status } > > do you know if it’s a bug or new behaviour? As I understand it (and according to Nathaniel Talbot), it is a bug and breaks testunit. See bug 9300 at: [http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=9300&group\_id=426](http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=9300&group_id=426) ---
**Author:** ![sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecc23a/32.png) [@sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/sauy7)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2007, 6:17pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/workaround-for-1-8-6-with-commandline/90631/4 "2007-03-30T18:17:16Z")
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Jim F. wrote: > > do you know if it’s a bug or new behaviour? > > As I understand it (and according to Nathaniel Talbot), it is a bug > and breaks testunit. > See bug 9300 at: > > [http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=9300&group\_id=426](http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=9300&group_id=426) good to know. i’m preparing and installer for a classified system that was going to use 1.8.6 as we speak! i’ve revert to 1.8.5. thanks a bunch. -a ---
**Author:** ![sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecc23a/32.png) [@sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/sauy7)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2007, 7:03pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/workaround-for-1-8-6-with-commandline/90631/5 "2007-03-30T19:03:24Z")
On 3/30/07, removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) rote: > > > do you know if it’s a bug or new behaviour? It’s a bug. Already fixed in 1.9, but I haven’t heard anything about applying the fix to 1.8 branch yet. Which is unfortunate, as it breaks quite a few things. ---
**Author:** ![sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecc23a/32.png) [@sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/sauy7)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2007, 7:33pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/workaround-for-1-8-6-with-commandline/90631/6 "2007-03-30T19:33:31Z")
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Alexey V. wrote: > On 3/30/07, removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) rote: > > > > > do you know if it’s a bug or new behaviour? > > It’s a bug. Already fixed in 1.9, but I haven’t heard anything about > applying the fix to 1.8 branch yet. Which is unfortunate, as it breaks quite > a few things. thank you! -a ---
**Author:** ![sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecc23a/32.png) [@sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/sauy7)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2007, 7:42am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/workaround-for-1-8-6-with-commandline/90631/7 "2007-04-03T07:42:22Z")
On 4/2/07, Nobuyoshi N. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > It was fixed in 1.8, and doesn’t exist in 1.9. Ah, that is correct. Sorry for the confusion. Is there any prospect of patch release soon? I just had to write something like: “Prerequisites: Ruby 1.8.4 or 1.8.5 (but there is a known bug in 1.8.6)” in CruiseControl.rb 1.1 release documentation. This just doesn’t look good… ☹ ---
**Author:** ![sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/ecc23a/32.png) [@sauy7](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/sauy7)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 3:11pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/workaround-for-1-8-6-with-commandline/90631/8 "2007-04-02T15:11:23Z")
Hi, At Sat, 31 Mar 2007 02:02:11 +0900, Alexey V. wrote in [ruby-talk:246032]: > It’s a bug. Already fixed in 1.9, but I haven’t heard anything about > applying the fix to 1.8 branch yet. Which is unfortunate, as it breaks quite > a few things. It was fixed in 1.8, and doesn’t exist in 1.9.