From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <2c5a7c3362eeff4e33cf9c16f07a6149@quintile.net>
From: "Steve Simon" <steve@quintile.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:14:01 +0000
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [9fans] rx - wot no stderr?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 04ebd03c-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

I was surprised to find plan9's implementaion of
rx(1) and rexexec(8) don't support a seperate socket
for stderr out of the remote application.

I can see that it is not that great, but somtimes
when doing (from the manpage):

	eqn paper | rx kremvax troff -ms | rx deepthought lp

It would be nice to see your troff error messages
onscreen rather than having to collect them from the
printer.

Was the decision not to implement stderr strongly
felt, or just a case of "Its not worth the complexity"?

-Steve