Unix scripting help
soapdog at mac.com
Thu Sep 29 12:46:29 EDT 2005
First of all, I recommend taking a look at http://www.tldp.org/LDP/
abs/html/ which is the Advanced Bash Scripting Guide. A very good
There's a chapter under basic called exit and exit status which I
think will cover what you need, if all you need is a return value for
your script then use "exit 0" for zero is the default OK for unix.
I'll further check the guide to see if the background command you're
using (&) can be called from scripts, if I discover something new,
I'll send a new email to the list, in the mean time if exit 0 works,
drop me a note. :D
On Sep 29, 2005, at 1:14 PM, Chris Sheffield wrote:
> I can't get this to go through for some reason. So here it is again.
> I hope I'm not totally off topic here.
> I've got an installer in Rev that has to start a process under OS X
> using the shell function. I'm able to get the process to start
> just fine using a command line script. But the problem I'm having
> is this particular process does not return any value when started,
> and the shell command is not exiting because of this (at least
> that's what I assume is happening). So my script just kind of
> hangs at that point. The process I'm starting is the Valentina
> database server.
> So what I'm looking for is a way to run my script, which starts the
> process, but include in my script something that says, "Okay, I'm
> finished now", and will allow my handler to go on at that point.
> This is the current script I'm running with the shell function:
> pw=[PasswordHere] -- this is obtained earlier with an
> authentication dialog
> echo $pw | sudo -S /Library/RNSEServer/RNSEServer &
> Now, if I run these lines one at a time from a Terminal window
> everything works great. But if I run the script all at once,
> whether from Revolution or from a Unix script file, it hangs,
> almost as if the exit command isn't executing. So is there
> something I can use in place of 'exit' that will cause my script to
> finish? Or is there same way to cause the shell function not to
> wait like it does by default? I was previously using "open
> process" instead of shell, and that worked except that it would
> launch the process as the user who was logged into the computer
> rather than as the root user, and I need it to run as root.
> Any help would be appreciated.
> Chris Sheffield
> Read Naturally
> The Fluency Company
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
More information about the Use-livecode