Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/06/14/09:39:50
On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> On 14 Jun 2000, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
>
> > A truckload of batchfiles substitutes the normal
> > executables. But you cannot pipe stuff into batchfiles, usually, so
> > the usual pipes of PBM utitily calls passing data from one to the next
> > didn't work.
>
> It should be possible to invoke the batch files via an inferior
> COMMAND.COM, as in "command /c batch1.bat | command /c batch2.bat ...",
> no? That should work, since COMMAND.COM is just another program.
Yes, it is, but it's awful, and existing scripts would almost certainlyñ
not expect this to be necessary. They'll assume that if the PBM utilities
are present, a command line like
ppmquant < foo.ppm | ppmtogif > foo.gif
will work. There's also the additional complication that most PBM
utilities need their stdout and stdin in binary mode. I'm not sure
the command/c method preserves this across the '|', off hand. I'ld
have to test that.
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.
- Raw text -