From unknown Mon Jun 23 11:26:01 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#8408: A possible tee bug? Resent-From: George Goffe Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 20:41:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: report 8408 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: 8408@debbugs.gnu.org X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.13016904266966 (code B ref -1); Fri, 01 Apr 2011 20:41:02 +0000 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Apr 2011 20:40:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l8s-0001oJ-Dz for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:40:26 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l63-0001jy-IZ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l5x-00008X-50 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:26 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, T_DKIM_INVALID, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:41013) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l5w-00008I-GQ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:25 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=51346 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q5l5e-0005pW-Pd for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l5Z-000065-5t for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:01 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.44.51]:2312) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l5Z-000061-0n for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:01 -0400 Received: from wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.81]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p31KaxVM017563 for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:36:59 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1301690219; bh=YYUkOeINh7fp3/QnTpVxepPGgVg=; h=MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Content-Type; b=fqWxS6TGRub7PS62+bbbf06RAaeb08T8tQF5lNXx9JLc7DimQjz2B+RpHju02g2Ea /Iimgu9cZ2JRtpXGiIlvA== Received: from vws4 (vws4.prod.google.com [10.241.21.132]) by wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p31KawB6030014 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:36:58 -0700 Received: by vws4 with SMTP id 4so3295740vws.28 for ; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 13:36:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=XjDgcpomT0JPVs8D6CvpMQoBEbUvH5fW5tIlkpjkwWY=; b=Ub/pbW8wDnnXk3chJeBD74/9OXrySD4ZN0b4MkLwAbR1T8s5Grp9sCKjQWhLmVNTPp h5NF7/xWO2kLsgLA75WQ== DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=WrUWZfsiuCuK5fAgz7ymWqH+DGPsWK5KQ8d6Fc4Bus4qnq+JCF83q1U7qgcywUJRj8 phYiPIUGmXIq8TQZ6/eg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.65.148 with SMTP id j20mr1141896vci.276.1301690218406; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 13:36:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.187.72 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:36:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:36:58 -0700 Message-ID: From: George Goffe Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e644ddaa136631049fe15f86 X-System-Of-Record: true X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 199.232.76.165 X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:40:25 -0400 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) --0016e644ddaa136631049fe15f86 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Howdy, I have run several scripts and seen this behavior in all cases... tee somescript | tee somescript.log 2>&1 The contents of the log is missing a lot of activity... messages and so forth. Is it possible that there are other file descriptors being used for these messages? Regards, George... --0016e644ddaa136631049fe15f86 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Howdy,

I have run several scripts and seen this behavior= in all cases...

tee somescript | tee somescript.l= og 2>&1

The contents of the log is missing = a lot of activity... messages and so forth. Is it possible that there are o= ther file descriptors being used for these messages?

Regards,

George...
<= br>
--0016e644ddaa136631049fe15f86-- From unknown Mon Jun 23 11:26:01 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#8408: A possible tee bug? References: Resent-From: "Alan Curry" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 21:35:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 8408 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: goffe@google.com (George Goffe) Cc: 8408@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 8408-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B8408.130169367811528 (code B ref 8408); Fri, 01 Apr 2011 21:35:01 +0000 Received: (at 8408) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Apr 2011 21:34:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5lzK-0002zs-Ks for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 17:34:38 -0400 Received: from c-67-162-90-113.hsd1.in.comcast.net ([67.162.90.113] helo=kosh.dhis.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5lzI-0002zh-QD for 8408@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 17:34:37 -0400 Received: (qmail 19547 invoked by uid 1000); 1 Apr 2011 21:34:30 -0000 Message-ID: <20110401213430.19545.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> From: "Alan Curry" Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 16:34:30 -0500 (GMT+5) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) George Goffe writes: > > Howdy, > > I have run several scripts and seen this behavior in all cases... > > tee somescript | tee somescript.log 2>&1 > > The contents of the log is missing a lot of activity... messages and so > forth. Is it possible that there are other file descriptors being used for > these messages? I can't tell what you're trying to do from this incomplete example, but it looks like you're expecting the 2>&1 to do something other than what it's actually doing. It's only pointing the second tee's stderr to wherever its stdout was going. If the above pipeline is run in isolation from an interactive shell prompt, the 2>&1 is accomplishing nothing at all, since stderr and stdout will already be going to the same place (the tty) anyway. tee's stderr will normally be empty; it would only print an error message there if it had trouble writing to somescript.log. Post a more complete description of your intent. -- Alan Curry From unknown Mon Jun 23 11:26:01 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#8408: A possible tee bug? Resent-From: George Goffe Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:38:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 8408 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Alan Curry Cc: 8408@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 8408-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B8408.130169742816709 (code B ref 8408); Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:38:02 +0000 Received: (at 8408) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Apr 2011 22:37:08 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5mxn-0004LS-Vi for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:37:08 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([74.125.121.67]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5mxk-0004K5-Or for 8408@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:37:05 -0400 Received: from wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.69]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p31Mawv1005006 for <8408@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:36:59 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1301697419; bh=XB86/5dAw05QcSiUC91VuuB4TaQ=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=P77+BF4phHIQnoUU6IC367H8MkIgniqFweJbEFcYFux2LjbDAr2rZSGpeemmmOyuX caeJ0Pp2PxjIjiIpuKQHg== Received: from vws20 (vws20.prod.google.com [10.241.21.148]) by wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p31Macht010811 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <8408@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:36:57 -0700 Received: by vws20 with SMTP id 20so4114409vws.24 for <8408@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 15:36:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=zzRhBKv/2baXHLdbWV5sSf82LoWcEi/6x3cQP3pYnO0=; b=AAbt+IRiiUEf6N+coOlmrP/OUnp6BLVAfJR0e21QwiqkBOjgG4GSIIYHlHg/UZLQil z26mrTWYj/isAS3gN4Yg== DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=V2qKWOxo1iqfaoRWv9ttl/xDEEoVzDZWC24F+Ki9UcQk9MT7zF1L4NUZrSF0JRB3pI bplMNzhtOrSz3F9+LiOA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.60.133 with SMTP id p5mr37845vch.206.1301697417170; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 15:36:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.187.72 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:36:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110401213430.19545.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> References: <20110401213430.19545.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:36:57 -0700 Message-ID: From: George Goffe Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e0cb4e88770727ce90049fe30cc6 X-System-Of-Record: true X-Spam-Score: -6.6 (------) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.6 (------) --e0cb4e88770727ce90049fe30cc6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Alan, Oops. I goofed... My apologies. The example would be this "somescript | tee somescript.log 2>&1". The intent is to capture all the output (stdout and stderr) from "somescript". "somescript" runs several commands that may or may not utilize other FDs. I was hoping to get a better output than what you might get from the script command which records all the messages + a ton of other things like escapes which are a pain to eliminate. Does this make better sense? Regards, George... On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Alan Curry wrote: > George Goffe writes: > > > > Howdy, > > > > I have run several scripts and seen this behavior in all cases... > > > > tee somescript | tee somescript.log 2>&1 > > > > The contents of the log is missing a lot of activity... messages and so > > forth. Is it possible that there are other file descriptors being used > for > > these messages? > > I can't tell what you're trying to do from this incomplete example, but it > looks like you're expecting the 2>&1 to do something other than what it's > actually doing. It's only pointing the second tee's stderr to wherever its > stdout was going. > > If the above pipeline is run in isolation from an interactive shell prompt, > the 2>&1 is accomplishing nothing at all, since stderr and stdout will > already be going to the same place (the tty) anyway. > > tee's stderr will normally be empty; it would only print an error message > there if it had trouble writing to somescript.log. > > Post a more complete description of your intent. > > -- > Alan Curry > --e0cb4e88770727ce90049fe30cc6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Alan,

Oops. I goofed... My apologies.

The example would be this "somescript | tee somescript.log 2>= ;&1".

The intent is to capture all the ou= tput (stdout and stderr) from "somescript". "somescript"= ; runs several commands that may or may not utilize other FDs. I was hoping= to get a better output than what you might get from the script command whi= ch records all the messages + a ton of other things like escapes which are = a pain to eliminate.

Does this make better sense?

R= egards,

George...

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Alan Curry <pacman-cu@kosh.dhis.org> = wrote:
George Goffe writes:
>
> Howdy,
>
> I have run several scripts and seen this behavior in all cases...
>
> tee somescript | tee somescript.log 2>&1
>
> The contents of the log is missing a lot of activity... messages and s= o
> forth. Is it possible that there are other file descriptors being used= for
> these messages?

I can't tell what you're trying to do from this incomplete example,= but it
looks like you're expecting the 2>&1 to do something other than = what it's
actually doing. It's only pointing the second tee's stderr to where= ver its
stdout was going.

If the above pipeline is run in isolation from an interactive shell prompt,=
the 2>&1 is accomplishing nothing at all, since stderr and stdout wi= ll
already be going to the same place (the tty) anyway.

tee's stderr will normally be empty; it would only print an error messa= ge
there if it had trouble writing to somescript.log.

Post a more complete description of your intent.

--
Alan Curry

--e0cb4e88770727ce90049fe30cc6-- From unknown Mon Jun 23 11:26:01 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#8408: A possible tee bug? References: Resent-From: "Alan Curry" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:42:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 8408 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: goffe@google.com (George Goffe) Cc: 8408@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 8408-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B8408.130169767917075 (code B ref 8408); Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:42:01 +0000 Received: (at 8408) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Apr 2011 22:41:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5n1r-0004RM-Bp for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:41:19 -0400 Received: from c-67-162-90-113.hsd1.in.comcast.net ([67.162.90.113] helo=kosh.dhis.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5n1p-0004RA-J4 for 8408@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:41:18 -0400 Received: (qmail 20161 invoked by uid 1000); 1 Apr 2011 22:41:11 -0000 Message-ID: <20110401224111.20160.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> From: "Alan Curry" Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:41:11 -0500 (GMT+5) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) George Goffe writes: > Alan, > > Oops. I goofed... My apologies. > > The example would be this "somescript | tee somescript.log 2>&1". > > The intent is to capture all the output (stdout and stderr) from > "somescript". "somescript" runs several commands that may or may not utilize > other FDs. I was hoping to get a better output than what you might get from > the script command which records all the messages + a ton of other things > like escapes which are a pain to eliminate. > > Does this make better sense? Well, you still have the 2>&1 in the wrong place. If you want it to affect the stderr of the command to the left of the pipe, you have to put it to the left of the pipe. From unknown Mon Jun 23 11:26:01 2025 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#8408: A possible tee bug? Resent-From: George Goffe Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:54:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 8408 X-GNU-PR-Package: coreutils X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Alan Curry Cc: 8408@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 8408-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B8408.130169839218091 (code B ref 8408); Fri, 01 Apr 2011 22:54:01 +0000 Received: (at 8408) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Apr 2011 22:53:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5nDL-0004hk-Sb for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:53:12 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.44.51]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5nDJ-0004hW-E0 for 8408@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:53:10 -0400 Received: from kpbe14.cbf.corp.google.com (kpbe14.cbf.corp.google.com [172.25.105.78]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p31Mr3ag008659 for <8408@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:53:03 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1301698384; bh=bvyVZmZKfihdqwZ8gwhrI6vMnN0=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=T7ZiQfs7IFQKAwMzGHrpOyfNVkeur/7C0fPgQSbBbmsS/rtSXz5chha8TjqRkyTkU mrZs7j5E7/ExRZ7kbI3yQ== Received: from vws12 (vws12.prod.google.com [10.241.21.140]) by kpbe14.cbf.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p31Mr1Lu006337 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <8408@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:53:02 -0700 Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so3021457vws.3 for <8408@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 15:53:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=flil25rLax7K5FomYIYc9xWDS6mZcwwQVL1vZcHAjXg=; b=Dvl09UiLmlOvImz6PBtjyC/wvMKSqXXnbhfYTTTcnHx/kbG7q6i+RYzcxE+pMq4HS4 5uba40zBQjioNuHvZAhQ== DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=TfcqM8xnUWQa0WQox6FKd/yB93P2GYGL8Vxj2WDwJWqOJwVsY7u+vVS/cy/CELK8dK d1MNRZuQWBCWQOyhvP2Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.46.210 with SMTP id k18mr1151240vcf.171.1301698381526; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 15:53:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.187.72 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:53:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110401224111.20160.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> References: <20110401224111.20160.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:53:01 -0700 Message-ID: From: George Goffe Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6470edaa2b86a049fe34579 X-System-Of-Record: true X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) --0016e6470edaa2b86a049fe34579 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Alan, Thank you for your help. Sorry to bother you with such a trivial "problem". I'm still learning "unix" after all these years. Sigh. Have a GREAT weekend and, again, Thanks. George... On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Alan Curry wrote: > George Goffe writes: > > Alan, > > > > Oops. I goofed... My apologies. > > > > The example would be this "somescript | tee somescript.log 2>&1". > > > > The intent is to capture all the output (stdout and stderr) from > > "somescript". "somescript" runs several commands that may or may not > utilize > > other FDs. I was hoping to get a better output than what you might get > from > > the script command which records all the messages + a ton of other things > > like escapes which are a pain to eliminate. > > > > Does this make better sense? > > Well, you still have the 2>&1 in the wrong place. If you want it to affect > the stderr of the command to the left of the pipe, you have to put it to > the > left of the pipe. > > --0016e6470edaa2b86a049fe34579 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Alan,

Thank you for your help.

= Sorry to bother you with such a trivial "problem". I'm still = learning "unix" after all these years. Sigh.

Have a GREAT weekend and, again, Thanks.

Geor= ge...

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Ala= n Curry <pa= cman-cu@kosh.dhis.org> wrote:
George Goffe writes:
> Alan,
>
> Oops. I goofed... My apologies.
>
> The example would be this "somescript | tee somescript.log 2>&= amp;1".
>
> The intent is to capture all the output (stdout and stderr) from
> "somescript". "somescript" runs several commands t= hat may or may not utilize
> other FDs. I was hoping to get a better output than what you might get= from
> the script command which records all the messages + a ton of other thi= ngs
> like escapes which are a pain to eliminate.
>
> Does this make better sense?

Well, you still have the 2>&1 in the wrong place. If you want = it to affect
the stderr of the command to the left of the pipe, you have to put it to th= e
left of the pipe.


--0016e6470edaa2b86a049fe34579-- From unknown Mon Jun 23 11:26:01 2025 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.427 (Entity 5.427) X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org From: help-debbugs@gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System) To: George Goffe Subject: bug#8408: closed (Re: bug#8408: A possible tee bug?) Message-ID: References: <4D96683D.5010005@draigBrady.com> X-Gnu-PR-Message: they-closed 8408 X-Gnu-PR-Package: coreutils Reply-To: 8408@debbugs.gnu.org Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 00:07:02 +0000 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----------=_1301702822-24548-1" This is a multi-part message in MIME format... ------------=_1301702822-24548-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Your bug report #8408: A possible tee bug? which was filed against the coreutils package, has been closed. The explanation is attached below, along with your original report. If you require more details, please reply to 8408@debbugs.gnu.org. --=20 8408: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D8408 GNU Bug Tracking System Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems ------------=_1301702822-24548-1 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: (at 8408-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Apr 2011 00:06:03 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5oLr-0006MP-Dh for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 20:06:03 -0400 Received: from mail1.slb.deg.dub.stisp.net ([84.203.253.98]) by debbugs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5oLp-0006Lt-5o for 8408-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 20:06:02 -0400 Received: (qmail 45329 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2011 00:05:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.2.25?) (84.203.137.218) by mail1.slb.deg.dub.stisp.net with SMTP; 2 Apr 2011 00:05:54 -0000 Message-ID: <4D96683D.5010005@draigBrady.com> Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 01:05:17 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?P=E1draig_Brady?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: George Goffe Subject: Re: bug#8408: A possible tee bug? References: <20110401213430.19545.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 8408-done Cc: 8408-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) On 01/04/11 23:36, George Goffe wrote: > Alan, > > Oops. I goofed... My apologies. > > The example would be this "somescript | tee somescript.log 2>&1". > > The intent is to capture all the output (stdout and stderr) from > "somescript". "somescript" runs several commands that may or may not utilize > other FDs. somescript 2>&1 | tee log > I was hoping to get a better output than what you might get from > the script command which records all the messages + a ton of other things > like escapes which are a pain to eliminate. You could also try using `script` and then later filtering the output through something like http://www.pixelbeat.org/scripts/ansi2html.sh cheers, Pádraig ------------=_1301702822-24548-1 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Apr 2011 20:40:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l8s-0001oJ-Dz for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:40:26 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l63-0001jy-IZ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l5x-00008X-50 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:26 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, T_DKIM_INVALID, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:41013) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l5w-00008I-GQ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:25 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=51346 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q5l5e-0005pW-Pd for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l5Z-000065-5t for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:01 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.44.51]:2312) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q5l5Z-000061-0n for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:37:01 -0400 Received: from wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.81]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p31KaxVM017563 for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:36:59 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1301690219; bh=YYUkOeINh7fp3/QnTpVxepPGgVg=; h=MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Content-Type; b=fqWxS6TGRub7PS62+bbbf06RAaeb08T8tQF5lNXx9JLc7DimQjz2B+RpHju02g2Ea /Iimgu9cZ2JRtpXGiIlvA== Received: from vws4 (vws4.prod.google.com [10.241.21.132]) by wpaz17.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p31KawB6030014 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:36:58 -0700 Received: by vws4 with SMTP id 4so3295740vws.28 for ; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 13:36:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=XjDgcpomT0JPVs8D6CvpMQoBEbUvH5fW5tIlkpjkwWY=; b=Ub/pbW8wDnnXk3chJeBD74/9OXrySD4ZN0b4MkLwAbR1T8s5Grp9sCKjQWhLmVNTPp h5NF7/xWO2kLsgLA75WQ== DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=WrUWZfsiuCuK5fAgz7ymWqH+DGPsWK5KQ8d6Fc4Bus4qnq+JCF83q1U7qgcywUJRj8 phYiPIUGmXIq8TQZ6/eg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.65.148 with SMTP id j20mr1141896vci.276.1301690218406; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 13:36:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.187.72 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:36:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:36:58 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: A possible tee bug? From: George Goffe To: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e644ddaa136631049fe15f86 X-System-Of-Record: true X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 199.232.76.165 X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:40:25 -0400 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) --0016e644ddaa136631049fe15f86 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Howdy, I have run several scripts and seen this behavior in all cases... tee somescript | tee somescript.log 2>&1 The contents of the log is missing a lot of activity... messages and so forth. Is it possible that there are other file descriptors being used for these messages? Regards, George... --0016e644ddaa136631049fe15f86 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Howdy,

I have run several scripts and seen this behavior= in all cases...

tee somescript | tee somescript.l= og 2>&1

The contents of the log is missing = a lot of activity... messages and so forth. Is it possible that there are o= ther file descriptors being used for these messages?

Regards,

George...
<= br>
--0016e644ddaa136631049fe15f86-- ------------=_1301702822-24548-1--