Quoting Tomi Ollila (2013-05-22 09:50:46) > On Tue, May 21 2013, Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> wrote: > > > Quoting Tomi Ollila (2013-05-21 20:42:30) > >> --- > >> > >> Note quickly written untested code (but compiles!), just to show an idea... > >> > >> This implements (i hope) curl(1) --stderr option in notmuch(1): > >> > >> --stderr <file> > >> Redirect all writes to stderr to the specified file > >> instead. If > >> the file name is a plain '-', it is instead written to > >> stdout. > >> > >> This would be useful in emacs interface. > > > > Hm, shouldn't it be possible to bind a pipe(2) to stderr instead? I > > mean in the process of running the notmuch binary (i.e. somewhere > > along the lines of fork and exec)? > > Yes, if emacs(1) were smarter ;/
Uh >,< > > I've implemented this for alot, which does not use the binary but > > directly calls into libnotmuch, but does so in a helper process. Said > > helper has a pipe(2) on stderr and the alot process reads from it and > > turns any line into a log message. > > It is unfortunate that you have to do that -- libnotmuch should not > emit anything to stderr... We've briefly discussed what changes > are needed to libnotmuch what could be done there but... :) > > <questionable advice> > Instead of running separate process you could have both ends of the > pipe in same process and check after libnotmuch call whether there > is data in the reading end of the pipe. I think pipe buffers like 4k > of data. If you used socketpair(2) that buffers 100k of data by > default in Linux systems. Still, using nonblocking fds are > advisable if using this hack ;D > </questionable advice> Umm, no I don't see how that would work. I mean I'd have to dup(2) a fd to 2, but that means not only libnotmuch will write stuff to it but anything ever written to stderr by alot also ends up there. It is also a means of protecting alot against any fatal errors in libnotmuch, like segfaults and stuff like this. I'm not sure if that's changed, but libnotmuch used to call exit once in a while taking alot with it. With a separate subprocess you can just log this and restart the process and you don't ever lose any mail. But yes, it's kind of a hack. Justus _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch