From: Michele Andreoli (m.andreoli@tin.it)
Date: Sat Dec 09 2000 - 20:34:44 CET
On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 04:01:18PM +0100, Albrecht Kleine nicely wrote:
> > It is ugly, but do not use pipes or additional ram.
>
> Agree, it is ugly in fact. AFAIK I need at least one pipe for capturing
> sed-output because the sed man page doesn't mention a switch for an
> output to a file. But a single read-pipe is easy to handle, reading 4096
> byte in a loop until EOF.
>
As alternative, you can use "ex", the vi engine. We have "ex" in muLinux.
It do not output anything when used in the batch mode. But, please, use
it only with the bare syntax:
cat command_file | ex buffer
For example, this piece of code send a replacement command, then "wq"
to ex, via pipe:
cat << END | ex buffer
1,$ s/a/b/g
wq
END
In this way, you have to open a pipe only in order to send your
commands, and 1024 bytes are enough for that.
It seems that "ex" do not accept multiple commands, without a newline.
> At all I've never expected to run in _that_ kind of trouble.
> Perhaps later I'll dive into that some more asking the kernel gurus
> as Karl-Heinz suggested, but not _now_ . (Unfortunately I've already
> wasted hours for that single simple dumb problem.)
>
It is not urgent!
Michele
-- In summing up, I wish I had some kind of affirmative message to leave you with, I don't. Would you take two negative messages? - Woody Allen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mulinux-unsubscribe@sunsite.auc.dk For additional commands, e-mail: mulinux-help@sunsite.auc.dk
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Sat Feb 08 2003 - 15:27:17 CET