From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Redirecting standard output Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:45:33 +0200 Organization: Programmerer Ingebrigtsen Message-ID: References: <83oc402ky4.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1303386616 17578 80.91.229.12 (21 Apr 2011 11:50:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:50:16 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 21 13:50:12 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QCsOh-0000K7-8n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:50:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53570 helo=lists2.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QCsOg-0004ll-IK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:50:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:41761) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QCsOd-0004jw-Pf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:50:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QCsOc-0003TH-Gj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:50:07 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:50237) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QCsOc-0003S4-6u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:50:06 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QCsOa-0000Ev-Oq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:50:04 +0200 Original-Received: from cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no ([84.215.51.58]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:50:04 +0200 Original-Received: from larsi by cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:50:04 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 34 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAFVBMVEVeeooxN00WFx4IBxNE U3UCAQuyvcbPy792AAACfElEQVQ4jW2TzXbjIAyFlYRhbVw364DJrKfWsLczTPYNZU/aHN7/EeYK pz+nZ7Ry9KErcUWIVPwe1KKrw3/zZKqJelbf85X6m4nL/vYtryvR1Vhnhs+85HStVLbOOmdiVHGO caZ6D6oN2IF0rIpoza2AeWTbz2qu9+OqgQLg2J+e4gcoc+thEk983rLfTsNdH2cAfE480oan5Be9 VtwwA5XhmNkdrhySM/sVlChAHXPyBzUKMN1K4jxTiSPz0/56Cuz2KygU54LmI1Ss2f9NroudDAZ/ 6ER1QQVusn9LtqOTPQtQ2wNV88g8ufGpJKtLNPFcb3pzqAIygHNd76Ut7lBuvoyQEmCNMcMsTsSF Nr4eE7x7xLjzfT0giuzmV0hEw0O29B5CjA4vDLA485GXDW02PvxmJlJf8ohSf7yggqlev4K46D87 AOeg+gmWIXZm3D2FlwEmwpp79DzY03PYedvJarW4BtvoFC7Dg7uELVxpL1G2jGezHPPzFr4FXUul DQ0QgxMkXk7qmJiVLrNxZGTzVfWw2Fl1xG523sy1BxCtN6QRtGPOTh2GumtA16uknS27kPN0876+ ErZZINaA6485Z16801syq9Z2lJ04PIwge9PoYYwmaQIw2iAViB5TibmlXgVM9JDx/HjCN5neyryl 9RikRxaxkbDUszTpoTQNI/ITM6qkR6cx8GsrkYKUAt45KhZDcKe4wKNLeQ3OdAGYdWlavWklOWQO dJkXaAHgTwpZkWojU/am920upB2/SwGg8tIu39t+zYYmleXQRdb1dlm9whWDgCQkHdDEZWdwkeSw RoC8jvhzdXjCL1wjpw+QznAYI6eRm43/AIjt7loNxg+IAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC Mail-Copies-To: never X-Now-Playing: Split's _Golden Dance Classics_: "9wd - Spice" User-Agent: Gnus/5.110016 (No Gnus v0.16) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:di9b2JLpTgOIWHmnsUzpRrfrYrA= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:138606 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Hm... oh! process.c isn't compiled at all on MS-DOS? > > It is, but only its last part, the one outside the "#ifdef subprocesses" > condition. Which doesn't include start-process and its subroutines, > of course. Right. > And I'm not sure this is the only reason why we have 2 APIs instead of > one. Does anybody know what the (historical) reason for these two functions was? The differing function parameters has always puzzled me: (start-process NAME BUFFER PROGRAM &rest PROGRAM-ARGS) (call-process PROGRAM &optional INFILE BUFFER DISPLAY &rest ARGS) > And anyway, I'm not sure your conclusion about these 2 APIs being very > similar is indeed true. Nor do I see how start-process solves your > problem: it doesn't let you separate stdout and stderr at all, unless > you go through a shell. What am I missing? No, `start-process' doesn't help me at all. I was just thinking that if I made the change in `call-process', I should probably look at extending the same parameters in `start-process', and then I started wondering about why the two functions existed separately, which is when I wrote that email. :-) -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/