Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!linac!midway!clout!chinet!les
From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: Regular pipe vs. Named Pipe
Message-ID: <1991Jun13.144148.3842@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 13 Jun 91 14:41:48 GMT
References: <14192: Jun923: 16:0791@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <28552162.546B@tct.com> <25293:Jun1217:36:2291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Organization: Chinet - Chicago Public Access UNIX
Lines: 14

In article <25293:Jun1217:36:2291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:

>In contrast, a system doesn't have to support named pipes to be UNIX.
>Lots of UNIX systems didn't---and still don't---have named pipes. So
>named pipes aren't part of UNIX. They're just an add-on, a feature which
>happens to be supported in similar ways by several vendors but isn't
>available everywhere.

In what way is this different from sockets?  Or any other IPC mechanism
besides plain files and signals that doesn't require a common parent to
set things up?

Les Mikesell
  les@chinet.chi.il.us