X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Date:	Mon, 6 Nov 2006 06:56:00 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: why doesn't "exec" replace current executable w/new
Message-ID:	<20061106115600.GA1095@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<454F2076 DOT 3010606 AT tlinx DOT org> <006301c70199$e076e1e0$a501a8c0 AT CAM DOT ARTIMI DOT COM>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<006301c70199$e076e1e0$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.11
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 11:51:20AM -0000, Dave Korn wrote:
>On 06 November 2006 11:46, Linda Walsh wrote:
>>So why the top level bash?  Is there anything the parent bash can do
>>that the child bash cannot?
>
>The obvious WAG would be "wait for SIGCHLD, meaningfully" :)

Well, there's that, and there's also the fact that Cygwin has to emulate
exec.  It's not a Windows function.  There is no way to tell, e.g., a
Windows command shell to keep waiting for a new process that has been
execed without keeping the old one around.

See CreateProcess and the WaitFor* functions.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -