Bug 79512

Summary:	ssh's -n flag has no effect
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1	Reporter:	Johan Walles <johan.walles>
Component:	openssh	Assignee:	Tomas Mraz <tmraz>
Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG	QA Contact:	Brian Brock <bbrock>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	2.1
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i686
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2005-02-04 10:48:50 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Johan Walles 2002-12-12 15:51:12 UTC

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130

Description of problem:
It seems as if the -n flag has no effect.  Doing...

ssh foo cat /etc/redhat-release

... works fine, but if I do...

cat|ssh foo cat /etc/redhat-release

... I don't get my prompt back after finding out foo's RH version.  To work
around this, I tried the -n flag, which is supposed to "Redirect input from
/dev/null." according to "ssh --help".  However, doing...

cat|ssh -n foo cat /etc/redhat-release

... has the same problem.  The reason I thought it would help to "Redirect input
from /dev/null." was that this works fine as well:

cat /dev/null|ssh foo cat /etc/redhat-release


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
90%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. cat|ssh -n foo cat /etc/redhat-release


Actual Results:  I get to see foo's Redhat version string, but I don't get my
prompt back after that.


Expected Results:  I should have gotten to see foo's Redhat version string, and
gotten my prompt back afterwards.


Additional info:

Comment 1 Johan Walles 2002-12-13 15:21:49 UTC

I'm starting to get the feeling that the reason is not ssh, but that cat wants
stdin to EOF before I get my prompt back.  If this is really what's going on
here this should be NOTABUG, but I still want a second opinion on it (even if
that opinion is NOTABUG :-).

Comment 2 Tomas Mraz 2005-02-04 10:48:50 UTC

Re comment #1 - of course :-)