Message-Id:	<4.3.1.0.20001030063606.00ad1e20@pop5.banet.net>
X-Sender:	usbanet DOT farley3 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net
X-Mailer:	QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1
Date:	Mon, 30 Oct 2000 06:39:22 -0500
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
From:	"Peter J. Farley III" <pjfarley AT banet DOT net>
Subject:	Re: Bash 2.04 beta 6a
Cc:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1001030072054.11071A-100000@is>
References:	<4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 20001029163249 DOT 00b1c670 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net>
Mime-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

At 07:22 AM 10/30/00 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
 >On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Peter J. Farley III wrote:
 >> Well, I did some more code reading yesterday, and the 
PerlProc_popen
 >> procedure defined inside perl definitely uses 'exec("sh -c 
command")'
 >> to run the command.  I'm going to try to figure out how to use or
 >> copy the perl code
 >
 >Before you copy that code, I'd suggest to make sure that invoking 
Bash
 >with "sh -c" indeed removes the special meaning of #.

Will do.

 >> The code I saw is deliberately bypassed for DJGPP with "#if
 >> !defined(DJGPP)" (among other systems).
 >
 >This might have been done for good reasons, which far outweigh the
 >problems with the little gork that started this thread.

Yes, further reading of that code shows use of pipe() and fork(), which 
we do not have.  The guts of the command execution are in a 
perl-private exec/spawn wrapper, and this is the code to which I was 
really referring.

More as I get to it.
---------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org OR
                      pjfarley AT banet DOT net)

- Raw text -