[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?
From: |
Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: |
Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail? |
Date: |
Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:34:11 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Macintosh/20081105) |
Karl Berry wrote:
> It's probably useful to add this functionality to all coreutil filters.
>
> Wouldn't it suffice to add buffer control options to cat, rather than
> every program?
Unfortunately no -- it's the other program that needs to be taught about
the buffering policy to adopt. tail -f for example uses explicit
flushing, so it works. sed and grep need special options.
Paolo
- Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, David Corlette, 2008/11/20
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Matthew Wakeling, 2008/11/20
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Paolo Bonzini, 2008/11/21
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Pádraig Brady, 2008/11/20
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Brian Dessent, 2008/11/21
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Jim Meyering, 2008/11/21
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Reuben Thomas, 2008/11/21
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Paolo Bonzini, 2008/11/21
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Andreas Schwab, 2008/11/21
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Jim Meyering, 2008/11/21
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Jim Meyering, 2008/11/22
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Pádraig Brady, 2008/11/22
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Jim Meyering, 2008/11/22
- Re: Possible bug with grep/sed/tail?, Brian Dessent, 2008/11/22