Re^2: passing setup via pipeline

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: passing setup via pipeline by cdarke (Prior) on May 25, 2010 at 10:17 UTC
First, 'source' is a c-shell or bash built-in, so you need to specify the shell. Second, that would just create the aliases in one child process. The second open will run a different process without the aliases.	[reply]
Re^3: passing setup via pipeline by ikegami (Patriarch) on May 25, 2010 at 17:29 UTC
I think you want `open3` or similar. `open3(TO_CHLD, FR_CHLD, undef, 'bash')` [download] Then you can print out commands to TO_CHLD and collect the output from FR_CHLD. Then you can issue shell commands including aliases, and the state of the shell (incl current work dir and environment settings) will persist between commands. Hum, actually, you would need a pty instead of a pipe to get interactive behaviour. IPC::Run can do all of this pretty easily, so it's probably a better choice than `open3`	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: passing setup via pipeline by almut (Canon) on May 25, 2010 at 18:20 UTC
... Then you can print out commands to TO_CHLD and collect the output from FR_CHLD. I think one of the tricky things with `open3` is how to correctly detect the end of multi-line responses, e.g. when issuing commands like `ls -l` (or the respective alias), as the pesistent shell won't close the pipe when done with the command.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: passing setup via pipeline by ikegami (Patriarch) on May 25, 2010 at 22:20 UTC
I don't think the OP needs to isolate responses. I take "I'm writing a Tk entry that emulates term" to mean he wants to build a console.	[reply]
Re^3: passing setup via pipeline by Corion (Patriarch) on May 25, 2010 at 08:00 UTC
Your idea does not make any sense to me.	[reply]