X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=QmaN
	BhgTf8HK5YYmPvN+z1QVHjpT9UUkRWRcJgKQsfADFBKCXpXtBmyB9NcPBEJBqihk
	EeN8CYKmbudzvnsLHR5fd/g35XmxqeQtnj2LDScfbJH5HefaNJEjmKZ0pyFKwU4I
	mS2DmsUfVuqQkM6IRRUqSrIiKX4bnsVXRvsCHbU=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; s=default; bh=O3USKBCx1j
	j9lYaQjezNN+wdLKI=; b=i+YQohAuADBITo0f/EsBlT2vrQRYicq/B9MuUbN3vE
	D4L/CQ6sVfXT9pOaUIemtZK7kvU7BCfZsLM2VXl/+O0zztsQyQcDva5k/Lb6CBsE
	xZxtsmha9HmvE3R4Jy3xOrMqKQTbU96vGXPdAj3jy3Qd6djaLxtd198dcmLR78Zx
	4=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,UNSUBSCRIBE_BODY autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*i:sk:2e4799d, H*MI:sk:2e4799d, H*f:sk:2e4799d, Pipe
X-HELO:	mx1.redhat.com
Subject:	Re: Pipe behavior clarification?
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<CAPJ9Yc9BJXrvrFz3pKQiEzzQ8a8f0_9rPuLn+o+mc5_Zo2wdmg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <2e4799d9-e81f-fabb-9f31-3c569a70efc9 AT cs DOT umass DOT edu>
From:	Eric Blake <eblake AT redhat DOT com>
Openpgp:	url=http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg
Message-ID:	<841dff2b-65d9-9d24-2b88-6742f1ea92cb@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:32:46 -0600
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<2e4799d9-e81f-fabb-9f31-3c569a70efc9@cs.umass.edu>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

--956MA7krNkR8pI4ee5hwG4boxhaSqr6W3
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="H13E6tw94we5uuF6tWiEuVsdSerjmiBTD";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: Eric Blake <eblake AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <841dff2b-65d9-9d24-2b88-6742f1ea92cb AT redhat DOT com>
Subject: Re: Pipe behavior clarification?
References: <CAPJ9Yc9BJXrvrFz3pKQiEzzQ8a8f0_9rPuLn+o+mc5_Zo2wdmg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <2e4799d9-e81f-fabb-9f31-3c569a70efc9 AT cs DOT umass DOT edu>
In-Reply-To: <2e4799d9-e81f-fabb-9f31-3c569a70efc9 AT cs DOT umass DOT edu>


--H13E6tw94we5uuF6tWiEuVsdSerjmiBTD
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 01/22/2017 04:23 PM, Eliot Moss wrote:
> On 1/22/2017 3:19 PM, David Bala=C5=BEic wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> Is this a correct pipe behavior?
>>
>> $ echo booo | tee >(md5sum --tag) >/dev/null
>> MD5 (-) =3D 9c8b79bdf79ef0ee73a77b8d36d27a2d
>>
>> $ echo booo | tee >(md5sum --tag) | cat >/dev/null
>=20
> Here's what I think happens, even if it is a bit counter-intuitive:
>=20
>>(...) creates a subprocess, whose input comes from some kind
> of pipe or socket, and tee is presented with a filename it can
> use to write to that socket.
>=20
> The *output* of the >(...) subprocess is hooked up to what is
> known to be the output of tee *at the time the subprocess is
> created*.  This happens *before* any > redirections are done.

Rather, all >() and > redirections are performed in left-to-right order.
 But you are correct that the second >/dev/null is overwriting the
stdout that was originally given by >(md5sum), and therefore tee is NOT
writing to the md5sum process.

>=20
> However, in the case of the | pipe, that plumbing is set up
> *before* the >(...) construct is acted on.

Also correct. Mixing >() and | is usually not what you want, as you are
no longer writing to the pipeline.

>=20
> Note that you could do >(md5sum --tag >whatever) if you want
> to specifically control the output of md5sum.
>=20
> I am sure someone more knowledgeable will correct me if I've
> missed anything important here :-) ...

You got the gist of it.  Order matters, and specifying more than one
stdout (by any mix of >, >(), or |) is generally not what you want.

--=20
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org


--H13E6tw94we5uuF6tWiEuVsdSerjmiBTD--

--956MA7krNkR8pI4ee5hwG4boxhaSqr6W3
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJYhhQOAAoJEKeha0olJ0Nq2TkH/R+rX6auFcnc9yeBh/35vL05
xcWfknobeX+9ABMNISGJE9q8tIitQ7OrEHYu7vSMPht70VJSc+K4kCHtMxhSg77T
c47gVVDi1sjS6mFXpze31rTw9/nZ+k0IPuzvcKjwifso1Rb9o8cNFNrwPmYFS8yw
SboYHQre6a5hxqCQi9ABKcIJW9wkIhcI2Wfdi8xNlKsMZefKoDI9MLedHYgOJSEF
lYx9W96ywvgi1yf87mAS0LaeCNsmAvIlUjbyGQgqf0zyKxuunXvj2n3ZGaMJjeQn
8dx/+Ri8iroTWZeloxGP//M+BM1fuc57NTntHcOi1K++Ing+5lu2x0Le81bE7NA=
=ADmN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--956MA7krNkR8pI4ee5hwG4boxhaSqr6W3--

- Raw text -