From: Junio C Hamano Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 21:08:03 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] transport-helper: check if remote helper is alive Message-ID: <7vy5csvih8.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: Felipe Contreras writes: > On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >>>> ... But if we keep >>>> helper running, who will be communicating with it via these open >>>> pipes? The process that is calling finish_command() on fast-import >>>> and disconnecting from the helper won't be, as read/write to the >>>> pipe, even if we do not disconnect from here, will result in errors >>>> if the helper has already exited at this point. >>> >>> Nobody will send any further input, but in theory we could redirect >>> the pipe and send more commands. That's how it was designed. >> >> Who does the redirection to whom? > > The one that is doing all the redirections, transport-helper. > >> How would the process tree and >> piping constructed around the current system? > > I cannot parse that correctly, Sorry, s/the current system/& look like/; > but transport-helper is already > receiving the output from the remote-helper. OK, so you are envisioning that transport-helper would read from the helper after importer is done? If so, perhaps it is a prudent solution to disconnect in this version (to fix), and then in a separate patch that adds such an extension (I imagine it would involve that the helper advertising a capability or being invoked with an option to let transport-helper somehow know that it should continue the conversation once fast-import is done) to disable the disconnect here when that extension is in use?