> On Sunday, January 11, 2015 6:26 AM, Moritz Barsnick <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 02:07:57 +0100, [email protected] wrote: > >> I liked your idea also but it didn't make quite as much sense to me >> as the first solution. My problem is the use of the & character >> separating the ffmpeg command from the other stuff. I always THOUGHT >> that a single & causes a task to run in the background, and while > >> that's fine for cpulimit, it's not fine for ffmpeg because as I >> mentioned there are a couple other cleanup tasks that need to run >> after ffmpeg is finished, and if ffmpeg goes into the background, >> those tasks will run immediately. > > Fair enough - whatever suits you best. I like that first suggested > solution as well. Bourne shells do support the "wait" command to wait > for all background commands to return. > >> I'm a little confused as to why in the first example the sleep >> command is followed by a ; while in yours it's followed by && - > two >> different ways to indicate the same thing? > > No. One '&' followed by a second command launches the second command > once the first one has dropped to the background. > > Two '&&' lauches the second command only when the first one > terminates > and returns with "success" (exit code 0). 'sleep & > command' makes no > sense to me. > > > Moritz && launches the second command if the first one succeeds. || launches the second command if the first one fails. ; launches the second command after the first one finishes. Nick _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list [email protected] http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
