Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 13:05:40 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <3791-Sat27Jan2001130538+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.6
CC: Michel AT smr DOT nl
In-reply-to: <6480-Sat27Jan2001121754+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Subject: Re: Emacs/grep problem
References: <B0FEA00E82A7D1118BFB00A0CC990278463309 AT argon DOT smr DOT nl> <6480-Sat27Jan2001121754+0200-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 12:17:55 +0200
> From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
> 
> I guess I could fix this by keeping the pipe running as long as the
> commands return non-negative status.

One possible complication with this approach is what should the pipe
return?  Should we return the status of the last program in the pipe?
the largest status? the last non-zero status?