Zsh Mailing List Archive Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author

Re: Piping stderr (was Re: Two bug reports)

X-seq: zsh-workers 16897
From: Wayne Davison <wayned@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Piping stderr (was Re: Two bug reports)
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 16:17:37 -0800 (PST)
Cc: Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1020324190207.ZM30608@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm

On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> I really think zsh should be tracking >(...) as a job and waiting for
> it rather than treating it as if disowned.

Yes, that would be a good change, IMO.

> That would be a much cleaner solution from the viewpoint of the shell
> language (though possibly a bit messier internally) than would adding
> a new pipe syntax.

I agree.  After looking at my proposed stderr-pipe syntax, I don't like
it very much.  So, using the existing 2>>(command) syntax is a good way
to go, especially if zsh could be made to wait for the "command" to
complete.

..wayne..

References:
- Re: Piping stderr (was Re: Two bug reports)
  - From: Bart Schaefer

Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author