From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-17060-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 28088 invoked by alias); 23 Jul 2002 20:18:29 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 28029 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2002 20:18:27 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO gash2.peakpeak.com) (207.174.178.17)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Jul 2002 20:18:27 -0000
Received: from fleche.redhat.com (ta0196.peakpeak.com [204.144.244.196])
	by gash2.peakpeak.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA06608;
	Tue, 23 Jul 2002 14:18:22 -0600
Received: by fleche.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 4847D4F832D; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 14:24:15 -0600 (MDT)
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: RFA: >, >>, and "tee" operators
References: <20020723183956.GA28558@nevyn.them.org>
	<871y9ub6fj.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
	<20020723192325.GA30738@nevyn.them.org>
From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com
X-Attribution:  Tom
X-Zippy:  I had a lease on an OEDIPUS COMPLEX back in '81...
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 13:20:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <20020723192325.GA30738@nevyn.them.org>
Message-ID: <87d6te8a6o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00463.txt.bz2

>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:

>> transcript > FILE
>> transcript >> FILE
>> transcript | COMMAND

Daniel> I don't like this syntax very much.  It looks too much like
Daniel> dumping the output of a command ("transcript") to the file,
Daniel> not like a redirection for the future output.

Good point.

Daniel> Also - is piping to a command actually useful?

I don't know.  I haven't even been running with this patch in place,
since the feature in general is only occasionally useful to me.  I
thought I saw a request for this (piping to a command)?

Daniel> Hmm...  How do you feel about:
Daniel> 	transcript [-append] FILE
Daniel> 	tee [-append] FILE
Daniel> Where transcript replaces ">" and ">>"?

That looks good to me.  Or even `transcript [-tee] [-append] FILE'.
Or maybe `[-notee]', with tee as the default.

Tom