Re: bug#15228: [PATCH] Close output port of I/O pipes

[Josep Portella Florit]

> I dunno how much we should push this "processes are a single port"
> abstraction.  In many ways for OPEN_BOTH pipes it's easier to deal with
> an input and an output port and a PID instead of the pipe abstraction.
> WDYT?  We could just expose `open-process' from (ice-9 popen) to start
> with.  It would be good to allow other fd's or ports to map to the child
> as well, e.g. stderr or any particular port; but I don't know what
> interface we should expose.

Since patching was inconvenient for me, I eventually used:

(use-modules ((ice-9 popen) #:select (open-process)))

Which works even though `open-process` is not exported.  For me,
exporting `open-process` and documenting it would be enough.

I also like the Racket interface to processes:
<https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/subprocess.html>
(I've mostly used the `process` procedure.)