Path: csiph.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail
From: Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org>
Newsgroups: gnu.bash.bug
Subject: Re: leaks fd for internal functions but not external command
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 11:52:18 -0400
Lines: 15
Approved: bug-bash@gnu.org
Message-ID: <mailman.2086.1563897210.2688.bug-bash@gnu.org>
References: <CAOj-5WDk=8kt=J8wO23giFVWRp5=_GbCNB2HQO87Upc4kkTg+g@mail.gmail.com> <5c34ecd5-c8b2-7000-46bc-1bbe3f71f163@case.edu> <CAOj-5WCFbUoU1x2aUvidT1opUbGeG2jFSaM__ch=SUAfzQbQ9w@mail.gmail.com> <78679ee9-fdaf-5180-d32f-81d92b936538@case.edu> <CAOj-5WBei5KMar7c967=jSwZRsW-Rz-0iL20TQMeuQoz61rfkw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj-5WA_URW5b7a2EU+rR=T_wbTDEpOM_PSo9yNyU-Dqj+cWaA@mail.gmail.com> <f6acdcca-4c7c-b05c-004d-9b8ceab1e169@case.edu> <CAOj-5WA0b5Lv9GhXkK6gwoS1uVd2B1a0048tZ6sUNnhVHS+ixg@mail.gmail.com> <20190723155218.GG1218@eeg.ccf.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lists.gnu.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: usenet.stanford.edu 1563897211 19313 209.51.188.17 (23 Jul 2019 15:53:31 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: action@cs.stanford.edu
To: bug-bash@gnu.org
Envelope-to: bug-bash@gnu.org
Mail-Followup-To: bug-bash@gnu.org
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAOj-5WA0b5Lv9GhXkK6gwoS1uVd2B1a0048tZ6sUNnhVHS+ixg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 139.137.100.1
X-BeenThere: bug-bash@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell <bug-bash.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-bash@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Mailman-Original-Message-ID: <20190723155218.GG1218@eeg.ccf.org>
X-Mailman-Original-References: <CAOj-5WDk=8kt=J8wO23giFVWRp5=_GbCNB2HQO87Upc4kkTg+g@mail.gmail.com> <5c34ecd5-c8b2-7000-46bc-1bbe3f71f163@case.edu> <CAOj-5WCFbUoU1x2aUvidT1opUbGeG2jFSaM__ch=SUAfzQbQ9w@mail.gmail.com> <78679ee9-fdaf-5180-d32f-81d92b936538@case.edu> <CAOj-5WBei5KMar7c967=jSwZRsW-Rz-0iL20TQMeuQoz61rfkw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj-5WA_URW5b7a2EU+rR=T_wbTDEpOM_PSo9yNyU-Dqj+cWaA@mail.gmail.com> <f6acdcca-4c7c-b05c-004d-9b8ceab1e169@case.edu> <CAOj-5WA0b5Lv9GhXkK6gwoS1uVd2B1a0048tZ6sUNnhVHS+ixg@mail.gmail.com>
Xref: csiph.com gnu.bash.bug:15216

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 04:40:03PM +0100, Sam Liddicott wrote:
> Is using {xxx}>... suppose to give me a file handle I can use as I wish (as
> you say), or not?
> 
> Using explicit descriptors e.g. 10>... behaves consistently whether the the
> command is internal or external.
> 
> Having bash allocate the descriptor is not consistent.
> 
> Sam

I'm getting major deja vu here.

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2012-11/msg00082.html