Roland Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi Guillaume! > > On 2 Feb 2007, at 14:48, Guillaume Chazarain wrote: > > > 2007/2/2, Roland Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >> That's a bug, right? > > > > No, if you want something like: (echo toto; date; echo titi) > file > > to work in your shell, you'll be happy to have the seek position > > shared in the processes.
Absolutely right. This has been part of Unix since the beginning. > As a naive user I'd probably expect that each of the above adds to > the output, which perfectly fits the O_APPEND flag (to be set by the > shell, of course). No, no, O_APPEND has slightly different semantics. > The immediate point was about the flags, though, and having > O_NONBLOCK on or off certainly is a _design_ choice when writing a > program. If I remove O_NONBLOCK, I have a right to expect that I/O > functions do not return EAGAIN! Generally you don't want to mess with shared resouces like stdin, stdout and stderr. Phil. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/