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

Re: PATCH: 3.0.6/3.1.6: Re: All sorts of file-descriptor strangeness

X-seq: zsh-workers 8198
From: Zefram <zefram@xxxxxxxx>
To: schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Bart Schaefer)
Subject: Re: PATCH: 3.0.6/3.1.6: Re: All sorts of file-descriptor strangeness
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:12:52 +0100 (BST)
Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <991010211147.ZM2563@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> from Bart Schaefer at "Oct 10, 1999 9:11:47 pm"
Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm

Bart Schaefer wrote:
>zagzig[21] coproc tr a-z A-Z
>[1] 2510
>zagzig[22] exec 5<&p
>zagzig[23] ls -l /proc/self/fd
...
>Should descriptor 5 have been passed on to "ls" in this manner?

Yes.  You explicitly opened fd 5; it should be passed on to child
processes that you create.

>                                                    In particular, I think
>it would break this:
>
>    coproc foo
>    bar <(baz <&p)

Ah.  It probably would.  The coprocess fds are more of a special case
than I realised.

-zefram

References:
- Re: PATCH: 3.0.6/3.1.6: Re: All sorts of file-descriptor strangeness
  - From: Bart Schaefer

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