I'm not 100% sure about what's required on Windows. What may work is to set $SIG{INT} to "IGNORE" before spawning the children. Note that when you do so, your process won't be killed by ctrl-C, either - you'll just keep going.

Another option may be to fork/exec yourself instead of using system, and in the "child" process, do the above - that way the parent process will still be killable partway through while the children will continue to live on their own, e.g.:

for ($x=0; $x < scalar(@files); $x++ ) {
    $file=@files[$x];
    chomp $file;
    $cmd="clone -F $file ";
    print "Launching Command is: $cmd\n";
    my $pid = fork;
    if ($pid) {
        # parent
    } elsif (defined $pid) {
        $SIG{INT} = 'IGNORE';
        exec($cmd);
    } else {
        die "fork failed.";
    }
}
[download]

Finally, if you have control over the clone command, you can have that program ignore the INT signal.

The "/B" option appears to do what you want? (ignore CTL-C?)

No. It doesn't:

C:\test>perl -e" system 'start /b c:/perl64/bin/perl.exe -E\"$^|=1; sa
+y ++$i while sleep 1\"'; sleep 1000"
1
2
3
4
5
Terminating on signal SIGINT(2)
Terminating on signal SIGINT(2)
[download]

That's both processes aborting.

Contrast:

C:\test>perl -e" system 'start /min c:/perl64/bin/perl.exe -E\"$^|=1; 
+say ++$i while sleep 1\"'; sleep 1000"
Terminating on signal SIGINT(2)
[download]

The initial process terminates, the second process continues to run, outputting to its own window.

---

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.