Re: About problems with named pipes
Hi,
i wrote:
> > I did not see an insult but only some backtalk.
> Maybe you missed the cultural shift, but alas “Karen” has become an
> insult.
Employing a search engine with "Karen insult" ... ahum.
So you feel addressed as "middle class woman who is perceived as
entitled or excessively demanding" (from Wikipedia) ?
> > > Either you doctored the output
> > Are you telling me that this accusation is not meant as insult ?
> Of course it is not. It is very frequent to doctor a command output when
> posting her to hide irrelevant details or make it fit in the width of a
> mail.
In this particular case i did not doctor the commands or their program
output. In general i doctor in a way that is supposed to be
recognizable as such.
> > If you use a file object that was freshly made by mkfifo(1) as command in
> > a pipe, what complaint from bash do you get ?
> I get “command not found”, of course.
That would happen if the fifo gets created in a directory that is not
in the shell PATH.
I made my experiments in a way that the shell has a chance to find
the pipe as command.
> > -bash: /home/thomas/MyFifo: Permission denied
> I would like to point that “/home/thomas/MyFifo” is not the same thing
> as “MyFifo:”, so it seems you DID doctor the output.
It's the original message which i get when MyFifo is in my $HOME
directory which is listed when i put out $PATH.
I used "MyFifo". The shell complains about "/home/thomas/MyFifo".
No doctoring involved, although i was tempted to remove the
"/home/thomas/" part before quoting the program output.
Have a nice day :)
Thomas
Reply to: