Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!haven!adm!xadmx!rbj@dsys.icst.nbs.gov
From: rbj@dsys.icst.nbs.gov (Root Boy Jim)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: RTFM... (really: sed -n 100,115p)
Message-ID: <19708@adm.BRL.MIL>
Date: 22 May 89 17:57:11 GMT
Sender: news@adm.BRL.MIL
Lines: 32

? From: Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu>

? In article <7320@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> I wrote:
? >>Are you
? >>implying that each filter should read all its input ??
? >
? >Yes, unless it knows that a process providing that input is prepared to
? >gracefully handle the situation when writing to stdout causes an
? >error.

[stuff deleted]

? So I still think that filters should read all their input.

Me too! I'm still waiting for `yes | <whatever>' to finish :-)

And of course I would expect `more' (and myself) to wait patiently for

	cat /x11r3.tar/core.src/core.tar.Z.a? | zcat | tar tvf - | more

to complete when I typed `q'. 

By now, we've all seen so many Broken Pipes that most of us don't
even see them anymore. If a program that is producing data really
needs to clean up after itself, it simply must catch SIGPIPES. Any
other behavior is sloppy coding.

? Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu>
? UUCP:    ...!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesi

	Root Boy Jim is what I am
	Are you what you are or what?