On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Charles Forsyth
charles.fors...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 May 2015 at 15:17, Daniel Bastos dbas...@toledo.com wrote:
What is the relationship between file descriptor 1 and /fd/1? When a
program runs, 1 is already open for writing. But apparently it's open only
On 12 May 2015 at 15:17, Daniel Bastos dbas...@toledo.com wrote:
What is the relationship between file descriptor 1 and /fd/1? When a
program runs, 1 is already open for writing. But apparently it's open only
for writing. A read on it yields inappropriate use of fd. The same seems to
happen
Good morning.
% cp /fd/1 /fd/0
cp: can't open /fd/1: '/fd/1' inappropriate use of fd
I can't open it for reading, but I could open it for writing. Why can't I
open it for reading?
--r d 0 glenda glenda 0 May 10 18:57 0
--rw--- d 0 glenda glenda 0 May 10 18:57 1
---w--- d 0 glenda glenda 0 May 10 18:57 2
is that what you want to know? or the reasons why the permissions are like that?
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Daniel Bastos dbas...@toledo.com wrote:
--r d 0 glenda glenda 0 May 10 18:57 0
--rw--- d 0 glenda glenda 0 May 10 18:57 1
---w--- d 0 glenda glenda 0 May 10 18:57 2
is that what you want to know? or the reasons why the permissions are like
that?
Except that OP wants to know why reading /fd/1 isn't allowed when
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Iruatã Souza iru.mu...@gmail.com wrote:
--r d 0 glenda glenda 0 May 10 18:57 0
--rw--- d 0 glenda glenda 0 May 10 18:57 1
---w--- d 0 glenda glenda 0 May 10 18:57 2
is that what you want to know? or the reasons why the permissions are like
Except that OP wants to know why reading /fd/1 isn't allowed when the
permissions allow it. I suspect something is a bit obscure, like the
implementation being different from the stated permissions.
i imagine that the permissions on the underlying device are wrong.
cons is 600 in rio, and i
