Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: Bi-directional pipe
- X-seq: zsh-users 10367
- From: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Bi-directional pipe
- Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 17:06:38 +0200
- In-reply-to: <060609025143.ZM4854@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mail-followup-to: zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-users-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <4486CBA2.9030501@xxxxxxxx> <060608202844.ZM10410@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44893A14.9040906@xxxxxxxx> <060609025143.ZM4854@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 2006-06-09 02:51:43 -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On Jun 9, 11:06am, Guillaume Chazarain wrote:
> } My solution is to do something like this:
> } echo "$LARGE_REQUEST" >&p &
> } read REPLY <&p
>
> In that case you don't have only two processes. If one process "knows"
> to fork for large writes, that process is prepared for the situation.
> Most read-stdin/write-stdout unix commands that one might execute are
> not so prepared, is my point.
Could you give an example? I'd say that's a bug in the command that
starts the bidirectional pipe. I don't see how commands like grep
could do anything.
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author