Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 23 Jul 2003 12:04:57 -0700 | From | "David S. Miller" <> | Subject | Re: kernel bug in socketpair() |
| |
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 14:54:49 -0400 (EDT) Glenn Fowler <gsf@research.att.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 11:23:07 -0700 David S. Miller wrote: > > On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 14:14:57 -0400 (EDT) > > Glenn Fowler <gsf@research.att.com> wrote: > > > > named sockets seem a little heavyweight for this application > > > I think it'll be cheaper than unnamed unix sockets and > > groveling in /proc/*/fd/ > > > And even if there is a minor performance issue, you'll more than get > > that back due to the portability gain. :-) > > named unix sockets reside in the fs namespace, no?
Right.
> so they must be linked to a dir before use and unlinked after use > the unlink after use would be particularly tricky for the parent process > implementing > cmd <(cmd ...) ...
Hmmm... true.
I honestly don't know what to suggest you use, sorry :(
Is bash totally broken because of all this? Or does the problem only trigger when using (cmd) subprocesses in a certain way? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |