From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kevin Ryde Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Support for (system '("echo" "foo" "bar")) Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 06:09:31 +1000 Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <87u15qpjwk.fsf@zip.com.au> References: <87ad7l9i8h.fsf@raven.i.defaultvalue.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1067545193 13456 80.91.224.253 (30 Oct 2003 20:19:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 20:19:53 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 30 21:19:49 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AFJGm-0007AQ-00 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 21:19:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AFJDx-000141-KC for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 15:16:53 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AFJ8K-0006fn-EB for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 15:11:04 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AFJ7W-0005qr-S3 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 15:10:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [61.8.0.36] (helo=snoopy.pacific.net.au) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AFJ72-0005C8-Ji for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 15:09:44 -0500 Original-Received: from mongrel.pacific.net.au (mongrel.pacific.net.au [61.8.0.107]) by snoopy.pacific.net.au (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id h9UK9eV0031405 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 07:09:40 +1100 Original-Received: from localhost (ppp92.dyn228.pacific.net.au [203.143.228.92]) by mongrel.pacific.net.au (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id h9UK9JDJ012437 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 07:09:20 +1100 Original-Received: from gg by localhost with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AFJ6r-0003O3-00; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 06:09:33 +1000 Original-To: guile-devel@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never In-Reply-To: (Greg Troxel's message of "29 Oct 2003 08:58:02 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2936 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2936 Greg Troxel writes: > > That said, a procedure to encapsulate the safer fork/exec/wait process > would be very nice. If it does a fork and exec then it could be called fork-exec :). The old DOS systems used to use "spawn" for that sort of thing I think (spawnl, spawnle, etc like the exec functions). Either way, if it can get the errno back to the parent when exec fails (and use _exit) then it'd be a nice improvement over a fork and exec one might write explicitly. (A close-on-exec pipe is a good way to do that.) _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel