bug#27368: Minor concern: Confusing tail warning

2017-06-17 Thread Jim Meyering
On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote: > On 17/06/17 14:30, Pádraig Brady wrote: >> On 17/06/17 07:35, Jim Meyering wrote: >>> In this new function, please move the declaration of "i" into the for-loop: >>> >>> +static bool >>> +any_non_regular (const struct

bug#27368: Minor concern: Confusing tail warning

2017-06-17 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 17/06/17 14:30, Pádraig Brady wrote: > On 17/06/17 07:35, Jim Meyering wrote: >> In this new function, please move the declaration of "i" into the for-loop: >> >> +static bool >> +any_non_regular (const struct File_spec *f, size_t n_files) >> +{ >> + size_t i; >> + >> + for (i = 0; i <

bug#27368: Minor concern: Confusing tail warning

2017-06-17 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 17/06/17 07:35, Jim Meyering wrote: > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote: > ... >> Two proposed patches for this are attached. > > Nice fixes. Thank you! > > In the NEWS addition: > >tail -f will now exit immediately if the output is piped >and

bug#27368: Minor concern: Confusing tail warning

2017-06-17 Thread Jim Meyering
On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote: ... > Two proposed patches for this are attached. Nice fixes. Thank you! In the NEWS addition: tail -f will now exit immediately if the output is piped and the reader of the pipe terminates. + tail -f will no

bug#27368: Minor concern: Confusing tail warning

2017-06-17 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 15/06/17 02:40, Pádraig Brady wrote: > On 14/06/17 16:03, Charlie Hagedorn wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Thank you for maintaining such useful and reliable tools. >> >> Today I came across an unexpected warning in tail. The warning is intended >> to handle this case: >> >> [:~]$ tail -f >> tail: warning:

bug#27368: Minor concern: Confusing tail warning

2017-06-15 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 14/06/17 16:03, Charlie Hagedorn wrote: > Hi! > > Thank you for maintaining such useful and reliable tools. > > Today I came across an unexpected warning in tail. The warning is intended > to handle this case: > > [:~]$ tail -f > tail: warning: following standard input indefinitely is

bug#27368: Minor concern: Confusing tail warning

2017-06-14 Thread Charlie Hagedorn
Hi! Thank you for maintaining such useful and reliable tools. Today I came across an unexpected warning in tail. The warning is intended to handle this case: [:~]$ tail -f tail: warning: following standard input indefinitely is ineffective which is both important and fun. Today, however, I