From:	kagel AT quasar DOT bloomberg DOT com
Date:	Thu, 19 Dec 1996 08:34:36 -0500
Message-Id:	<9612191334.AA17294@quasar.bloomberg.com >
To:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
Cc:	bas AT teclink DOT net, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.961219083946.24763J-100000@is> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Thu, 19 Dec 1996 08:44:39 +0200 (IST))
Subject:	Re: executing files
Reply-To:	kagel AT dg1 DOT bloomberg DOT com

   Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 08:44:39 +0200 (IST)
   From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>

   On Wed, 18 Dec 1996 kagel AT quasar DOT bloomberg DOT com wrote:

   > Of course this is exactly what system does except that the process the 
   > execprog argument system uses is: "command -c myjob" rather than "myjob"
   > which permits myjob to be a script.

   This is incorrect.  `system' only calls COMMAND.COM when its argument 
   turns out to be an invocation of a batch file, or of an internal command 
   (like `set' or `time').  In all other cases, it does the job by itself, 
   eventually calling `spawnve'.  COMMAND.COM is too dumb to let it do this 
   job.  For details, see the docs of `system' in the libc reference.

Thanks for the correction Eli.  I was only trying to point out that it is 
rarely necessary to code the program launch yourself as system() does the 
same thing you would, and I did not mean to mislead.  Thanks again.

-- 
Art S. Kagel, kagel AT quasar DOT bloomberg DOT com

A proverb is no proverb to you 'till life has illustrated it.  -- John Keats

- Raw text -