Re: Pipe behavior clarification?

2017-01-23 Thread David Balažic
On 23 January 2017 at 15:32, Eric Blake wrote: > On 01/22/2017 04:23 PM, Eliot Moss wrote: >> On 1/22/2017 3:19 PM, David Balažic wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> Is this a correct pipe behavior? >>> >>> $ echo booo | tee >(md5sum --tag)

Re: Pipe behavior clarification?

2017-01-23 Thread Eliot Moss
On 1/23/2017 9:32 AM, Eric Blake wrote: On 01/22/2017 04:23 PM, Eliot Moss wrote: On 1/22/2017 3:19 PM, David Balažic wrote: Hi! Is this a correct pipe behavior? $ echo booo | tee >(md5sum --tag) >/dev/null MD5 (-) = 9c8b79bdf79ef0ee73a77b8d36d27a2d $ echo booo | tee >(md5sum --t

Re: Pipe behavior clarification?

2017-01-23 Thread Eric Blake
On 01/22/2017 04:23 PM, Eliot Moss wrote: > On 1/22/2017 3:19 PM, David Balažic wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Is this a correct pipe behavior? >> >> $ echo booo | tee >(md5sum --tag) >/dev/null >> MD5 (-) = 9c8b79bdf79ef0ee73a77b8d36d27a2d >> >> $ ech

Re: Pipe behavior clarification?

2017-01-22 Thread Eliot Moss
On 1/22/2017 3:19 PM, David Balažic wrote: Hi! Is this a correct pipe behavior? $ echo booo | tee >(md5sum --tag) >/dev/null MD5 (-) = 9c8b79bdf79ef0ee73a77b8d36d27a2d $ echo booo | tee >(md5sum --tag) | cat >/dev/null Here's what I think happens, even if it is a bit

Pipe behavior clarification?

2017-01-22 Thread David Balažic
Hi! Is this a correct pipe behavior? $ echo booo | tee >(md5sum --tag) >/dev/null MD5 (-) = 9c8b79bdf79ef0ee73a77b8d36d27a2d $ echo booo | tee >(md5sum --tag) | cat >/dev/null It surprised me, that the output of md5sum is dealed the same way as the std output of tee in the seco

RE: Pipe behavior

2003-04-03 Thread Igor Pechtchanski
> display immediately but this did not happen. Can you help me understand > why? > > Thanks > Steven > > -Original Message- > From: Randall R Schulz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 4:41 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: P

RE: Pipe behavior

2003-04-03 Thread Steven Kilby
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Pipe behavior Steven, I assume the test program you're using to explore this behavior is pretty concise. Why don't you post it here? Randall Schulz At 16:44 2003-04-03, Steven Kilby wrote: >Randall, > >Thanks for the response. No, I am

RE: Pipe behavior

2003-04-03 Thread Randall R Schulz
en. Can you help me understand why? Thanks Steven Original Message- From: Randall R Schulz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 4:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pipe behavior Steven, At 16:28 2003-04-03, you wrote: >Hello, > >I have a question about pip

RE: Pipe behavior

2003-04-03 Thread Steven Kilby
elete it and any copies of it from your system and notify us via e-mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Randall R Schulz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 4:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pipe behavior Steven, At 16:28 2003-04-03, you wrote: &

Re: Pipe behavior

2003-04-03 Thread Randall R Schulz
Steven, At 16:28 2003-04-03, you wrote: Hello, I have a question about pipe behavior. I wrote a simple program that does a printf, sleeps for 5 seconds and then another printf. If I run the program with the following way: $ ./simple | cat The output is delayed until the program finished. I

Pipe behavior

2003-04-03 Thread Steven Kilby
Hello, I have a question about pipe behavior. I wrote a simple program that does a printf, sleeps for 5 seconds and then another printf. If I run the program with the following way: $ ./simple | cat The output is delayed until the program finished. I guessed that the pipe is buffered and