[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: fd leak with {fd}>
From: |
Chet Ramey |
Subject: |
Re: fd leak with {fd}> |
Date: |
Thu, 22 Nov 2012 14:15:21 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2 |
On 11/16/12 10:47 AM, Sam Liddicott wrote:
> Repeated executions of: { echo $fd ; } {fd}> /dev/null
> will emit different numbers, indicating that fd is not closed when the
> block completes.
This is intentional. Having been given a handle to the file descriptor,
the shell programmer is assumed to be able to manage it himself.
> As an interesting aside it seems not to be possible to close the FD within
> the block either:
>
> { echo $fd ; eval exec "$fd>&-" ; } {fd}> /dev/null
But this is not. There should be a way to ensure the fd's survival while
allowing it to be closed within the block. I will fix this for the next
version.
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU chet@case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
- fd leak with {fd}>, Sam Liddicott, 2012/11/16
- Re: fd leak with {fd}>,
Chet Ramey <=
- Re: fd leak with {fd}>, Sam Liddicott, 2012/11/22
- Re: fd leak with {fd}>, Pierre Gaston, 2012/11/23
- Re: fd leak with {fd}>, Chet Ramey, 2012/11/26
- Re: fd leak with {fd}>, Pierre Gaston, 2012/11/26
- Re: fd leak with {fd}>, Pierre Gaston, 2012/11/26
- Re: fd leak with {fd}>, Sam Liddicott, 2012/11/26
- Re: fd leak with {fd}>, Chet Ramey, 2012/11/26
- Re: fd leak with {fd}>, Sam Liddicott, 2012/11/26
- Re: fd leak with {fd}>, Chet Ramey, 2012/11/26