Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:54:11 -0500 From: Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> To: Andrey Chernov <ache@nagual.pp.ru> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tcsh being dodgy, or pipe code ishoos? Message-ID: <20030624185411.A43877@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20030624234501.GA51779@nagual.pp.ru>; from ache@nagual.pp.ru on Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 03:45:02AM %2B0400 References: <20030624183515.A42570@FreeBSD.org> <20030624234501.GA51779@nagual.pp.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Andrey Chernov <ache@nagual.pp.ru> [ Date: 2003-06-24 ] [ w.r.t. Re: tcsh being dodgy, or pipe code ishoos? ] > On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 18:35:15 -0500, Juli Mallett wrote: > > Anyone with insight into this? > > > > (jmallett@big-lizard:~)39% ( echo 1 ; ( ( echo 2 ; echo 3 ) | xargs -I% echo + % ) ) > > 1 > > + 2 > > + 3 > > Loks like stdout/stderr mix, but I not check the code, so just raw guess. Really? What makes you say that? All of these utilities deal with stdout. Where does stderr come into it? Yes I know about TTY races outputting to stdout and stderr from different processes, especially how confusing it is to have say foo | bar | baz and bar puts something on stderr, and baz buffers for a second. But I don't see how, practically, this comes into play? The first is clearly correct, but throwing a pipe of alll the combined stuff in seems to complicate matters, so I suspect either buggy pipe code (not unheard of) or buggy tcsh handling of pipes (possible). Thanx, juli. -- juli mallett. email: jmallett@freebsd.org; efnet: juli;
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030624185411.A43877>