Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 93309 invoked by uid 500); 14 Nov 2000 00:17:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 93297 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2000 00:17:14 -0000 Errors-To: From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." To: Subject: RE: Implementing split() on pipe buckets? Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:17:10 -0600 Message-ID: <002801c04dd0$3cd34930$92c0b0d0@roweclan.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <20001113214412.B25050@hand.dotat.at> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > From: Tony Finch [mailto:dot@dotat.at] > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 3:44 PM > > "William A. Rowe, Jr." wrote: > > > >I agree with you that duplicate can't work on a pipe or socket, but I really > >disagree here. We discussed at the filtering meeting that there are several > >key operations that must -always- be implemented, and -always- work. These > >would be create, destroy, read and split. > > No, we agreed that split couldn't work for pipes. Catching up on the thread, eh :-? I didn't catch that part... but the way I finally put it together is that we didn't really finish some of the edges (such a pipe/socket and so on.) Doesn't matter - pipes/sockets don't split or dup, and we have accessors for users who want them.