bug#51128: timeout --kill-after=0 seems to not send a kill 0s after the initial signal

[Christoph Anton Mitterer]

On Mon, 2021-10-11 at 16:49 +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> Well that wouldn't be that useful functionality,
> as why not just send a single kill signal in that case.

Well with the same argumentation one could say that timeout 0 command
doesn’t execute the command at all, since why should one call it with a
timeout, when there's anyway none?

Also it may make "sense" if the value is configurable e.g. via some
user input made before,...


And in my opinion, since this behaviour is really quite unexpected
(disabling an option, though explicitly setting it), it should at least
also be mentioned in the manpage, too.


Anyway,.. cheers,
Chris.