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

Re: <(...), >(...) and fds above 9

On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 3:09 AM Peter Stephenson
<p.stephenson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2019-07-01 at 11:00 +0100, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> >
> > It seems fds above 9 are closed in those forms of process substitutions.
> >
> > It doesn't happen for the =(...) form of process substitution.
> >
> > Is that intentional?
>
> I'd be surprised if there was any deliberate intention to make these different,
> but there may be some detail I can't think of.

<(...) does
entersubsh(ESUB_ASYNC|ESUB_PGRP, NULL);

whereas =(...) does
entersubsh(ESUB_PGRP|ESUB_NOMONITOR, NULL);

The fds above 9 are only closed for ASYNC, I think.
Messages sorted by: Reverse Date, Date, Thread, Author