Re^2: question about running a system and a perl function background

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: question about running a system and a perl function background by graff (Chancellor) on Dec 03, 2004 at 13:38 UTC
system 1, is Windows specific fork+exec that works better than fork+exec on Windows. Ah. I was actually wondering about that -- I had never seen "system 1," before and wasn't even sure whether it was a mistake. (I'm blissfully ignorant of most of the Windows-specific extensions to Perl.) Thanks.	[reply]
Re^3: question about running a system and a perl function background by Anonymous Monk on Dec 20, 2004 at 22:02 UTC
Hello, Is `system 1,` supposed to return the child's pid? It seems to return -1 when I tested it out. Is there any other windows command that might return the child's pid? Thanks for the response.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: question about running a system and a perl function background by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Dec 20, 2004 at 22:34 UTC
The "piped open" (See perlopentut) returns the pid of the child process. See also Re^5: question about running a system and a perl function background in this thread for an example of use. Examine what is said, not who speaks. The end of an era! "But you should never overestimate the ingenuity of the sceptics to come up with a counter-argument." -Myles Allen "Think for yourself!" - Abigail "Time is a poor substitute for thought"--theorbtwo "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham "Memory, processor, disk in that order on the hardware side. Algorithm, algorithm, algorithm on the code side." - tachyon	[reply]
Re^4: question about running a system and a perl function background by ikegami (Patriarch) on Dec 20, 2004 at 22:22 UTC
I believe it should. Have you tried printing `"$!"` and/or `"$^E"`? They may give you a meaning the cause of the error.	[reply] [d/l] [select]