[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles
From: |
Chet Ramey |
Subject: |
Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles |
Date: |
Tue, 9 Apr 2019 10:28:42 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 |
On 4/9/19 10:10 AM, konsolebox wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 8:19 PM Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> wrote:
>>
>> Just like that one time L. Walsh tried to write a bash boot script that
>> used <() to populate an array, and it failed because she was running
>> it too early in the boot sequence, and /dev/fd/ wasn't available yet.
>
> @Chet, Isn't bash supposed to use named pipes alternatively, and
> dynamically?
No. It's a build-time decision, and /dev/fd is preferred.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU chet@case.edu http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
- Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, (continued)
- Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, Chet Ramey, 2019/04/11
- Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, Greg Wooledge, 2019/04/11
- Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, Chet Ramey, 2019/04/11
- Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, Robert Elz, 2019/04/11
- Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, Chet Ramey, 2019/04/11
- Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, konsolebox, 2019/04/10
Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, konsolebox, 2019/04/09
Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, konsolebox, 2019/04/09