signalling upstream
From: bill pursell (bill.pursell_at_gmail.com)
Date: 11/11/05
- Next message: Kasper Dupont: "Re: signalling upstream"
- Previous message: David Schwartz: "Re: static linking broken"
- Next in thread: Kasper Dupont: "Re: signalling upstream"
- Reply: Kasper Dupont: "Re: signalling upstream"
- Reply: Jeffrey Schwab: "Re: signalling upstream"
- Reply: Bob Smith: "Re: signalling upstream"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 11 Nov 2005 04:02:49 -0800
I would like to be able to do the following:
% a | b | c | d
and have the process d send a sigusr1 to process a. The only
reasonable way I can see of doing this is to have everyone in the pipe
pass along meta-information about the pipe. (ie, a writes its pid, b
reads it and writes out a's pid as well as its own, etc.)
Unfortunately, this prohibits the use of standard apps in the pipe, so
I want to avoid that if possible.
The second possible solution I see is to have d use its gid information
and look in /proc (or a registry that each process registers with, eg
in a file in /var/run) to determine a's pid. This leads to
difficulties when the pipe looks like this:
% a | b | c | a | b | d
I'm trying to avoid having a controlling process, since I really want
the flexibility of setting up the streams on the command line. Does
anyone know of implementations that have done something like this?
Feed-back in a data flow is pretty standard, but I'm having a hard time
fitting it in to the *-nix pipe philosophy. Can I pull this off
without writing meta-information into the pipe?
- Next message: Kasper Dupont: "Re: signalling upstream"
- Previous message: David Schwartz: "Re: static linking broken"
- Next in thread: Kasper Dupont: "Re: signalling upstream"
- Reply: Kasper Dupont: "Re: signalling upstream"
- Reply: Jeffrey Schwab: "Re: signalling upstream"
- Reply: Bob Smith: "Re: signalling upstream"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|