Subject: Re: kernel bug in socketpair()

From: "David S. Miller" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 12:04:57 -0700

On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 14:54:49 -0400 (EDT)
Glenn Fowler <[email-masked]> wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 11:23:07 -0700 David S. Miller wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 14:14:57 -0400 (EDT)
> > Glenn Fowler <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> > > named sockets seem a little heavyweight for this application
> 
> > I think it'll be cheaper than unnamed unix sockets and
> > groveling in /proc/*/fd/
> 
> > And even if there is a minor performance issue, you'll more than get
> > that back due to the portability gain. :-)
> 
> named unix sockets reside in the fs namespace, no?

Right.

> so they must be linked to a dir before use and unlinked after use
> the unlink after use would be particularly tricky for the parent process
> implementing
> 	cmd <(cmd ...) ...

Hmmm... true.

I honestly don't know what to suggest you use, sorry :(

Is bash totally broken because of all this?  Or does the problem only
trigger when using (cmd) subprocesses in a certain way?