in reply to IPC::Run syntax question

My version of IPC::Run (0.78) has the following example in the documentation:

## First,a command to run:
   my @cat = qw( cat ) ;

## Using run() instead of system():
   use IPC::Run qw( run timeout ) ;

   run \@cmd, \$in, \$out, \$err, timeout( 10 ) or die "cat: $?"

   # Can do I/O to sub refs and filenames, too:
   run \@cmd, "in.txt", \&out, \&err or die "cat: $?"
   run \@cat, "in.txt", '>>', "out.txt", '2>>', "err.txt" ;

   # Redirecting using psuedo-terminals instad of pipes.
   run \@cat, '<pty<', \$in,  '>pty>', \$out_and_err ;

[download]

so, yes, @cat needs to be filled with the command and the arguments of the thing you want to run.

But if you're trying some basic things, why dabble with IPC::Run if the plain system() call or backticks can do your work already? What do you want to do?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: IPC::Run syntax question
by tlemons (Novice) on Feb 14, 2005 at 14:38 UTC
    Hi

    Thanks very much for the reply. Putting the command and its arguments into an array that becomes the first argument to 'run' is now obvious; thanks for pointing that out!

    I wish I could use something simpler than IPC::Run, but I don't think I can (please tell me I'm wrong).

    I need to run a program, and then do things with the program's output. So, system() (which doesn't allow this) isn't the right tool.

    Worse, I need to feed responses to the program as it runs. Backticks doesn't support this.

    I had initially looked at Open2(), but that didn't work on Windows XP. So, I'm trying IPC::Run, as it SEEMS to be the best solution.

    I'd very much value the opinion of others with more Perl experience than me (which, at this point, includes many house plants).

    Thanks! tl

[reply]
      Greetings, esteemed monks!

      I assume you also looked into open3? _________________________________________________________________________________
      Without me, it's just aweso
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom