[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lost output from asynchronous lists

From: Stephane Chazelas
Subject: Re: lost output from asynchronous lists
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 08:53:15 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-09-19)

On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 11:21:01PM -0000, Sven Mascheck wrote:
> >>>>  : > stdout > stderr
> > It fails on old Ultrix sh, which can't redirect the same fd more than once
> > in a single statement.  But that platform is relatively dead these days.
> More detailed:
> - It actually works (also on Ultrix) but it is not robust
>    in any traditional Bourne shell (except where fixed by the vendor):
>   $ echo x y > file1    > file2 # ok, all output in file2
>   $ echo x   > file1 y  > file2 # not ok, all output in file1 instead of file2

Hi Sven,

is it the order of the redirections that is not respected in
those old Bourne shells, or is it that only some of the
redirections are performed?


: > file1 > file2
: > file1 x > file2

create (and truncate) both file1 and file2 in any case?

Would that fork a process, BTW in those old shells?

Maybe a better way would be

exec 3> file1 3> file2 3>&-
(to truncate those files)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]