5 Nisan 2021 Pazartesi tarihinde Chet Ramey <chet.ra...@case.edu> yazdı:
> On 4/5/21 3:14 PM, Oğuz wrote: > >> 5 Nisan 2021 Pazartesi tarihinde Chet Ramey <chet.ra...@case.edu <mailto: >> chet.ra...@case.edu>> yazdı: >> >> There's no guarantee that file descriptors opened with socket(2) show >> up in >> /dev/fd. Bash doesn't emulate /dev/fd if the system provides it, so >> it's up >> to the OS on those systems whether they do or not. >> >> It doesn't generate that error on macOS, for instance, which has >> /dev/fd. >> >> >> I can reproduce the error, but it is coming from `tee', which tries to >> open `/dev/fd/??' as a regular file whereas it is a socket, and gets an >> ENXIO error. >> > > That's what I mean. What happens on a system that implements /dev/fd and N > in /dev/fd/N is a valid descriptor? There are varying answers. > > The simplest /dev/fd drivers just dup the file descriptor passed as an > argument. There are progressively more complex implementations. It's > not guaranteed they treat descriptors returned by socket(2) the same as > those returned by open(2), even to whether they show up in /dev/fd at all. > > If you don't have /dev/fd, all bets are off, of course, but then I'd guess > the error would be ENOENT. Yeah. If you have /dev/fd though you have /dev/fd/1 (and even /dev/stdout), so OP could have done `echo a | tee /dev/fd/1 >/dev/tcp/host/port' instead > > -- > ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer > ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates > Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU c...@case.edu http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/ > -- Oğuz
