Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: stdbuf -o0 -i0 via a Zsh native interface?
- X-seq: zsh-workers 51790
- From: Sebastian Gniazdowski <sgniazdowski@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Cc: Peter Stephenson <p.w.stephenson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: stdbuf -o0 -i0 via a Zsh native interface?
- Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 19:28:06 +0000
- Archived-at: <https://zsh.org/workers/51790>
- In-reply-to: <CAH+w=7Yo93RmMZS5EkKXFMx+MXxfPMFdEQnaaq0MSkvSwCOaSw@mail.gmail.com>
- List-id: <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
- References: <CAKc7PVAh95GL_kx1FiACaexEHsK8PVLrJ+T4KxnKTZr=5KDXMw@mail.gmail.com> <1297534493.4668003.1685024167868@mail.virginmedia.com> <CAH+w=7ZgA=80EP5peb6sO330hj2tY58LCJ=+7Lcr464L1A-JnQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKc7PVCj6NFJ_BNkQcU_c6_TY=q7vP9kyF034k2250f0xWPFbg@mail.gmail.com> <CAH+w=7Yo93RmMZS5EkKXFMx+MXxfPMFdEQnaaq0MSkvSwCOaSw@mail.gmail.com>
Ahso, that's why stdbuf uses ld-preload-like tricks to enforce the
buffer size… That makes me look more tolerant to your STTY-way
approach, i.e.: I suspect that ld-tricks are out of reach and I would
accept even STTY-like solution if only it would be implemented…
On Thu, 25 May 2023 at 19:09, Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 12:02 PM Sebastian Gniazdowski
> <sgniazdowski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > I think that it does solve the problem, if the buffer settings are
> > applied to external commands. I would say that they are, but your
> > answer gives doubts… are they applied?
>
> Once you fork/exec, the initialization of stdio buffers etc. is all
> redone inside the new process, as far as I know.
--
Best regards,
Sebastian Gniazdowski
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author