On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 09:25:37AM -0500, Randall S. Becker wrote:
> On January 15, 2018 2:06 AM, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> > I take "die exits with non-zero" as a piece of information for the
> > *users* so that they can write "if perl foo.pl; then something; fi" in shell
> > scripts. I do *not* interpret it as leeway for implementers of perl to choose
> > any random value as exit code. Choosing 162 just to be funky would be
> > short-sighted. [I'm saying all this without knowing how perl specifies 'die'
> > beyond the paragraph you cited. Perhaps there's more about 'die' that
> > justifies exit code 162.] I'd say that the perl port is broken.
> 
> I agree that 162 is wrong. Its interpretation is 128+signal, which
> clearly does not happen in this case. On the platform, if the perl
> script is via stdin, 162 or 169 are returned. If via file (perl
> file.pl), 255 comes back. The port has issues. I have an opened a bug
> report with the platform developers. Usual non-Open Source timeframes
> to fix apply. ☹

I believe the standard behavior for Perl with die is the following:

exit $! if $!;
exit $? >> 8 if $? >> 8;
exit 255; # otherwise

Is there an errno value on your port that matches 162?  Maybe EBADF?

On Linux, I get the following:

genre ok % printf die | perl -; echo $?
Died at - line 1.
9
-- 
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204