From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Feb  3 08:54:29 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8E71216A4CE; Tue,  3 Feb 2004 08:54:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sweeper.openet-telecom.com (mail.openet-telecom.com
	[62.17.151.60])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D7F0E43D48; Tue,  3 Feb 2004 08:54:26 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from peter.edwards@openet-telecom.com)
Received: from mail.openet-telecom.com (unverified) by
	sweeper.openet-telecom.com
	<T6788b761590a00021136c@sweeper.openet-telecom.com>;
	Tue, 3 Feb 2004 16:55:50 +0000
Received: from openet-telecom.com (10.0.3.126) by mail.openet-telecom.com
	(NPlex 6.5.027) (authenticated as Peter@openet-telecom.com)
	id 401F702800000D7C; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 16:55:47 +0000
Message-ID: <401FD23A.9070407@openet-telecom.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 16:54:18 +0000
From: Peter Edwards <peter.edwards@openet-telecom.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040120
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040131234955.17012E-100000@fledge.watson.org>
	<401FCCBE.2010008@openet-telecom.com> <xzpektc6rwo.fsf@dwp.des.no>
In-Reply-To: <xzpektc6rwo.fsf@dwp.des.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
cc: current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Coalescing pipe allocation
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 16:54:29 -0000

Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:

>Peter Edwards <peter.edwards@openet-telecom.com> writes:
>  
>
>>How would one "shut down" one direction of the pipe and still maintain
>>the other? I don't know how I can signal my intention not to read or
>>write to the end I leave open...
>>    
>>
>
>man 2 shutdown
>  
>
Shutdown requires a socket, and won't play with pipes:

$ cat t.c
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/socket.h>
#include <err.h>
#include <unistd.h>
int
main()
{
    int p[2];
    if (pipe(p) == -1)
        err(-1, "pipe");
    if (shutdown(p[0], SHUT_RD) == -1)
        err(-1, "shutdown");
    return 0;
}
$ cc -o t ./t.c
$ ./t
./t: shutdown: Socket operation on non-socket
$

>  
>
>>Is this portability issue so ridiculously out of date that the comment
>>in the pipe(2) manpage should be removed, or at least toned down?
>>    
>>
>
>No, POSIX only guarantees the traditional behaviour.  Bi-directional
>pipes are a non-portable BSDism.
>
>  
>
>>                                                                  It
>>seems silly to incur the costs of implementation you've mentioned and
>>then recommend that the feature not be used.
>>    
>>
>
>It can still be useful for programs in the base system, which do not
>need to be unconditionally portable to non-BSD systems.
>  
>
Fair 'nuff.