Does open process work on OS X now?

Wed Sep 29 14:07:39 EDT 2004

I can find nothing "easy" at this point.  I am still working on a external that will double fork exec on unix/ CreateProcess on windows and allows full stdin and stdout access. 

Kevin

-==-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-
Disclaimer:

Any resemblance between the above views and those of my
employer, my terminal, or the view out my window are purely
coincidental. 
Any resemblance between the above and my own views is non-deterministic.

 The question of the existence of views in the absence of anyone to hold
them
is left as an exercise for the reader. The question of the existence of
the reader
 is left as an exercise for the second god coefficient. 
(A discussion of non-orthogonal, non-integral polytheism is beyond the
scope of this article.)

 --- On Wed 09/29, Frank D. Engel, Jr. < fde101 at fjrhome.net > wrote:
From: Frank D. Engel, Jr. [mailto: fde101 at fjrhome.net]
To: use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:53:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Does open process work on OS X now?

Does open process accept parameters on any other platforms? I didn't think it would... Even so, check the docs on "open process": they explicitly state that, quote (2.2.1 docs), "On OS X systems, you can use the open process command to start up an application, but not a Unix process." Thus I suspect that it is not broken, and not a bug, which is why it was never Bugzilla'd. If you don't need to track the I/O from the process and simply want to start it up without waiting for its completion, you could try this: put shell(my_command & " > /dev/null 2>&1 &") into forgotten_var Otherwise, I'm not sure what you could (easily) use. On Sep 28, 2004, at 7:49 PM, K wrote: > > I now have Revolution 2.5. Wow, sexy new look but I still do not seem > to be unable to open process "/usr/bin/xxx -param" on MAC OS X. > Please advise if there is some work around I am unaware of. > > > NOTE: I cannot seem to locate this bug in the bug database. Since it > is so significant I would assume someone would have posted it. > > K > > > -==-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=- > Disclaimer: > > Any resemblance between the above views and those of my > employer, my terminal, or the view out my window are purely > coincidental. > Any resemblance between the above and my own views is > non-deterministic. > > The question of the existence of views in the absence of anyone to > hold > them > is left as an exercise for the reader. The question of the existence of > the reader > is left as an exercise for the second god coefficient. > (A discussion of non-orthogonal, non-integral polytheism is beyond the > scope of this article.) > > > > --- On Tue 09/28, K < nnoydb at excite.com > wrote: > From: K [mailto: nnoydb at excite.com] > To: use-revolution at lists.runrev.com > Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:01:25 -0400 (EDT) > Subject: Re: Does open process work on OS X now? > > I am attempting to exec() several different unix applications. > I have written a external to does a double fork() exec() and alllows > communication via stdin and stdout (buggy at the moment). I would > like to use open process since that is the generally supported method. > Previously the suggested fix was to use shell() however it is hardly > interactive. Kevin -==-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > ==-=-=-=-=-=- Disclaimer: Any resemblance between the above > views and those of my employer, my terminal, or the view out my > window are purely coincidental. Any resemblance between the > above and my own views is non-deterministic. The question of > the existence of views in the absence of anyone to hold them is > left as an exercise for the reader. The question of the existence > of the reader is left as an exercise for the second god > coefficient. (A discussion of non-orthogonal, non-integral > polytheism is beyond the scope of t > his article.) --- On Tue 09/28, Ken Ray < > kray at sonsothunder.com > wrote: From: Ken Ray [mailto: > kray at sonsothunder.com] To: use-revolution at lists.runrev.com Date: > Tue, 28 Sep 2004 14:23:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Does open process work > on OS X now? Well, open process has always worked on OS X AFAIK > - are you using it to launch an application, or is there something > else you've been trying to do that you weren't able to > do? Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software Web site: > http://www.sonsothunder.com/ Email: > kray at sonsothunder.com ______________________________________ > _________ use-revolution mailing > list use-revolution at lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/ > mailman/listinfo/use- > revolution _______________________________________________> r>Join 
 Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal > on the > Web! _______________________________________________ use- > revolution mailing list > > use-revolution at lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/ > listinfo/use-revolution > > _______________________________________________ > Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com > The most personalized portal on the Web! > _______________________________________________ > use-revolution mailing list > use-revolution at lists.runrev.com > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > > ----------------------------------------------------------- Frank D. Engel, Jr. <fde101 at fjrhome.net> $ ln -s /usr/share/kjvbible /usr/manual $ true | cat /usr/manual | grep "John 3:16" John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. $ ___________________________________________________________ $0 Web Hosting with up to 120MB web space, 1000 MB Transfer 10 Personalized POP and Web E-mail Accounts, and much more. Signup at www.doteasy.com _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution at lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!