Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!news.tmx.com.au!news.acay.com.au!nsw1.news.telstra.net!act.news.telstra.net!nsw.news.telstra.net!asstdc.scgt.oz.au!metro!metro!munnari.OZ.AU!news.Hawaii.Edu!news.uoregon.edu!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sgi.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!EU.net!news2.EUnet.fr!newsbr.eunet.fr!usenet From: fgm@osinet.fr (Frederic G. MARAND) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Named pipe with mknod Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 19:48:28 GMT Organization: Groupe SEDI / Agorus SA / OSI SARL / Lines: 13 Message-ID: <52rvql$5t4@newsbr.eunet.fr> References: <GORSKI.96Sep30150728@axiom.somewhere.de> <52qo86$kr1@godzilla.zeta.org.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.107.196.155 X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) wrote: >FreeBSD supports the POSIX syscall mkfifo(). There is no reason to >use mknod() to create named pipes except for backwards compatibility, >and since old BSDs didn't support named pipes there is nothing to be >backwards compatible with. There is one compatiblity reason: the command-line (not syscall) for System V mknod includes the "p" argument for creating a named pipe. It is therefore more easy to remember than a specific syscall. Granted, the gain is minimal, but not null.