Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade wrote:
On Mar 25, 2008, at 11:50 AM, Ralph Shumaker wrote:
I know that Lan didn't ask this directly, but I think he's wondering
why only two output channels were implemented. At least *I* am
wondering that. Why not stout, sterr, and stmisc?
The system was designed with the basic tools to let you do whatever
you needed to do.
Having stdin, stdout and stderr was considered the minimum. IIRC,
that's filehandles 0, 1 and 2 (respectively). Want another one? Open
a third filehandle. Nominally, this will need to not be the same as
0, 1 and 2, but this is where named pipes and fifos and devices and
just plain old files come in.
Fault the developer of the tool whose output is crap for being lazy,
not the operating system for lacking the particular tone of bell or
pitch of whistle you want.
:D
Gregory
Thank you for this most excellent description, Gregory. I now
understand much more about it. My curiosity has been satisfied.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
