On 04/27/2017 10:16 PM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
"Bill" == Bill Ricker writes:
Bill> Since Friday may be crowded by Cinco de Mayo and normal Friday crowds,
Bill> perhaps we should celebrate the nerdly May The Fourth (be WithYou) holiday
Bill> Thursday ?
I'm up for
> "Bill" == Bill Ricker writes:
Bill> Since Friday may be crowded by Cinco de Mayo and normal Friday crowds,
Bill> perhaps we should celebrate the nerdly May The Fourth (be WithYou) holiday
Bill> Thursday ?
I'm up for that. As far as I know, unless some vendor is
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Bill Ricker wrote:
> I've replied to Randal and the Social Secretary for Vice off-list.
>
> Anyone who wants to opt-in for either (a) planning or (b) tentative
> yes-please can reply me & I'll forward (to the list _once_ if needed).
>
I've replied to Randal and the Social Secretary for Vice off-list.
Anyone who wants to opt-in for either (a) planning or (b) tentative
yes-please can reply me & I'll forward (to the list _once_ if needed).
// Bill
// TOP POSTED WITH MALICE. Hi Uri!
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Randal L.
Sorry for the short notice, but I forgot. :)
I'll be in town for the Red Hat Summit at the Convention Center from
Monday through Sunday next week. The conference is Tuesday through
Thursday, but I deliberately booked my outbound on Sunday so I could
call forth an emergency social. Since Friday
On 04/27/2017 12:47 PM, Mike Small wrote:
Hi again. Maybe O_DIRECT is the flag you seek?
i suspect this has nothing to do with buffering. greg said he has an
issue with stopping the whole script pipeline with ^C. when stopping a
pipeline you issue a signal to a process group, not to a
I'd definitely start by not using csh. It has a pile of problems as a scripting
language. Especially related to pipes and file descriptors.
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
-Andrew
> On Apr 27, 2017, at 11:18, Bill Ricker wrote:
>
> Apparently i
Mike Small writes:
> Mike Small writes:
>
>> "Greg London" writes:
>>
>>> This may very well be a unix thing, not a perl thing,
>> ...
>>> The -nobuffer is trying to get it to flush its output
>>> to STDOUT, rather than buffer it a block at
Mike Small writes:
> "Greg London" writes:
>
>> This may very well be a unix thing, not a perl thing,
> ...
>> The -nobuffer is trying to get it to flush its output
>> to STDOUT, rather than buffer it a block at a time.
>
>
> If using a different shell
"Greg London" writes:
> This may very well be a unix thing, not a perl thing,
...
> The -nobuffer is trying to get it to flush its output
> to STDOUT, rather than buffer it a block at a time.
If using a different shell isn't a solution for you maybe there's a way
to get
Bill Ricker writes:
> $| won't
> do what you want.
>
> perldoc -v '$|'
>
> HANDLE->autoflush( EXPR )
> $OUTPUT_AUTOFLUSH
> $|
>
> If set to nonzero, forces a flush right away and after every write or print
> on the currently selected output channel. Default is 0 (regardless
Apparently i replied off-list. Here's my reply for those following along
at home.
// Bill
-- Forwarded message --
Is your interactive commandline provided by (ba)sh or [tcz]sh ?
I see your script is Csh.
That's one possible difference since that's where the pipe is actually
12 matches
Mail list logo