[Top][All Lists]

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

bash using unknown tmp - library based? static link on linux? (was Re: b

From: Linda Walsh
Subject: bash using unknown tmp - library based? static link on linux? (was Re: bash not using pipes or /tmp @ boot?)
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 22:17:42 -0700
User-agent: Thunderbird

Chet Ramey wrote:
On 10/6/14, 6:03 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
Not sure how but this went off into space, sorta...

Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 12:14:57PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
   done <<<"$(get_net_IFnames_hwaddrs)"
Where am I using a HERE doc?
<<< and << both create temporary files.

    Yeah... where?

Wherever $TMPDIR says to.  If $TMPDIR doesn't name a writable directory,
bash looks for various system definitions (P_tmpdir), finally defaulting
to /tmp or /var/tmp.
P_tmpdir?  in ENV?

I don't have TMP or TMPDIR in my env during normal runtime
and tmp's were put in /tmp... I don't know where they were going
@ boot time, as /tmp and /var/tmp were writeable, but still
TMP/TMPDIR were unset.  (anyway -- went back to the process substitution)
since that actually worked -- when trying to debug it earlier, it was
thought that might be the problem... but it *seemed* to be a local
redefinition of a global -- which actually doesn't make complete sense, as
the script worked interactively.

Hmmm...oh well... even if /var/tmp and /tmp were not mounted,
bash running as root could still create files in it.... so not
sure what the problem was.

Maybe if bash didn't create tmp files in non-standard locations,
this never would have been an issue (or just use pipes)..

Please.  Your assumptions about what is going on make your conclusions
shaky at best.
        Um...assumptions were that tmp files weren't getting created
in standard locations of /tmp or /var/tmp for unknown reasons.  Interactively
and @ run time, it works fine... it's probably some library bash is linking

speaking of which ... does anyone have static link working on linux these days,
or is the static link break a suse-special?  I wanted  a safe shell to put
on root, since the way things are going, I'm expecting bash to be the next
piece of software that has to be merged with systemd...

reply via email to

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