[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles
From: |
Chet Ramey |
Subject: |
Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles |
Date: |
Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:04:00 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.3 |
On 3/18/19 8:40 PM, Eduardo A. Bustamante López wrote:
> Having said that, have you tried process substitution as an option?
>
> You should be able to do something like:
>
>
> mycommand < <(printf %s 'super secret')
>
>
> That will:
>
> - not write the 'super secret' string to the file-system, nor
> - show the mentioned string in the process tree (because printf is a bash
> built-in command, and thus, does not require a fork).
>
That works if the process substitution implementation uses /dev/fd. If it
uses a named pipe, it will touch the file system.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU chet@case.edu http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, Daniel Kahn Gillmor, 2019/03/19
Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles, Robert Elz, 2019/03/19