Re: [arch-users] Re: EPIPE in standard utils ([issue41])

[Peter Conrad]

On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 05:10:59PM -0800, Tom Lord wrote:
> 
> But the implications are the same: utils such as sed shouldn't rely on
> `SIGPIPE' to bring about their demise;

Yep.

>  should treat EPIPE errors
> specially (at _least_ not spewing on stderr);

I don't see why an EPIPE on stdout or some other descriptor other than
stderr itself should not produce an error message on stderr. After all,
EPIPE is an *error* and that's what stderr is good for.

> and, at least arguably,
> should exit with 0 status on EPIPE to an output file.

Definitely not. Utilities (like sed) that write data to some output file
as part of their specified job should never exit with an "OK" status on
EPIPE (or any other error condition). That's an *error* that prevents them
from doing their specified job properly, which is definitely *not* "OK".

Bye,
        Peter
-- 
Peter Conrad                        Tel: +49 6102 / 80 99 072
[ t]ivano Software GmbH             Fax: +49 6102 / 80 99 071
Bahnhofstr. 18
63263 Neu-Isenburg

Germany