[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] terminal split
From: |
Yoshinori K. Okuji |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] terminal split |
Date: |
Thu, 6 Nov 2008 18:20:57 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.9 |
On Tuesday 04 November 2008 19:31:09 Vesa Jääskeläinen wrote:
> Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> > BTW, I would like to obtain the capability of handling pipes, so that we
> > can, say, "help | more". I guess you have the same idea in your mind.
> > This should be trivial, once the input and output are separate, right?
>
> I think this would need separated streams design in order to be
> functional. Not a bad idea as such.... I am wondering the gain however.
> What kind of implementation plan did you have for piping in example more?
In "if" conditions, pipes can be sometimes very useful. For example:
if ls | grep eth; then
# if any ethernet device is present, change the strategy...
set fallback="1 2"
fi
Also, a similar technique can be used to implement "getting an output as a
string". For example:
# Use the same password as the super user.
set password=$(sed -ne '/^root:/{s/root:\([^:]*\).*/\1/;p}' /etc/shadow)
Regards,
Okuji
Re: [PATCH] terminal split, Vesa Jääskeläinen, 2008/11/04
- Re: [PATCH] terminal split, Robert Millan, 2008/11/04
- Re: [PATCH] terminal split, Colin D Bennett, 2008/11/04
- [RFC] Multi-terminal support (Re: [PATCH] terminal split), Robert Millan, 2008/11/07
- Re: [RFC] Multi-terminal support (Re: [PATCH] terminal split), Yoshinori K. Okuji, 2008/11/22
- Re: [RFC] Multi-terminal support (Re: [PATCH] terminal split), Robert Millan, 2008/11/22
- Re: [RFC] Multi-terminal support (Re: [PATCH] terminal split), Yoshinori K. Okuji, 2008/11/25
- Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: [RFC] Multi-terminal support (Re: [PATCH] terminal split), Amin Azez, 2008/11/26