Dr. Werner Fink wrote:
The question rises: Why does the bash require a sub peocess/shell for the final command of a pipe sequence.
I'd think this is more or less a design choice at first (with one or the other issue, maybe for both solutions - though I can't construct a failing case for the Korn way at the moment).
From my daily work with automation scripts & Co. (OT: and yes, Werner, we have SLES ;-) ) I can say this is not a big deal. You have enough other ways in Bash to give ("pipe") data to the read builtin on the fly. You don't have any big problems with this behaviour.
Regards, Jan
