Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 18:04:10 +0100 From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: Peter Edwards <peter.edwards@openet-telecom.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Coalescing pipe allocation Message-ID: <xzpsmhs5c39.fsf@dwp.des.no> In-Reply-To: <401FD23A.9070407@openet-telecom.com> (Peter Edwards's message of "Tue, 03 Feb 2004 16:54:18 %2B0000") References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040131234955.17012E-100000@fledge.watson.org> <401FCCBE.2010008@openet-telecom.com> <xzpektc6rwo.fsf@dwp.des.no> <401FD23A.9070407@openet-telecom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Edwards <peter.edwards@openet-telecom.com> writes: > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav 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: hmm, you're right. I was convinces that it was possible to shut down one half of a pipe... DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpsmhs5c39.fsf>