Re: bash: no job control in this shell

[Matthew Woehlke]

Bob Proulx wrote:
> JimK wrote:
> > Which initially I didn't think really mattered, but I just found out that
> > man/less/more do not work after displaying their initial screen. Commands
> > like "q" are not processed like they should so you are stuck inside of
> > man/less/more.
>
> You would probably need "q\n" in order to get the data flushed to the
> subprocess.  This is probably a stdio buffering issue.  When the stdio
> library determines that the output is not a tty then the output is
> buffered into large blocks for performance reasons. 

That doesn't sound right, wouldn't an fflush be better? The '\n' might 
have undesired side effects.

> If the output is
> a tty then buffering is disabled.  (I can't remember if buffering is
> off or line buffered when the output is a tty.)

By default, stdout on a tty is line buffered and stderr is not buffered. 
At least, to the best of my knowledge :-).

--
Matthew
"Let's call it an accidental feature." -- Larry Wall