Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!nosc!crash!orbit!zuhause!bruce From: bruce@zuhause.MN.ORG (Bruce Albrecht) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: Pipe syntax... I think I'd better think it out again... Message-ID: Date: 19 Nov 90 23:01:26 GMT References: <1990Nov18.090654.24747@agate.berkeley.edu> Lines: 30 >In article <1990Nov18.090654.24747@agate.berkeley.edu> pete@violet.berkeley.edu (Pete Goodeve) writes: >I mentioned (in another article) a simple unix piped command that I'd used: > > ls -l | grep Nov > >Well, OK -- how would you do the equivalent with standard AmigaDOS commands >(LIST and SEARCH), even given that you had a shell with pipe characters? > >Using named pipes there SHOULD be no problem [pardon my ego -- I'll use >mine, but any pipe has the same result]: > > run list >IP:xx > search IP:xx Nov > >(Well, it looks good. Unfortunately if you try it, it doesn't work! >'SEARCH' won't read anything but a file -- not a PIPE: not a CON:! >This is a bug, though -- nothing inherent as far as I can tell. [Use Mat >instead, folks (:-)) -- it's three times as fast as SEARCH anyway...] It works fine on AmigaDos 2.02 using the standard PIPE:. Maybe we should all take a deep breath, and chant "It's in there!" Seriously, though, if a Commodore standard AmigaDOS program doesn't support input from pipes, send them a bug report. By the way, someone else claimed in another posting that More chokes on pipes, but it seems to work fine on the 2.0 version. -- bruce@zuhause.mn.org