Ken Hornstein <[email protected]> writes:
>>path-name would name a command which would be invoked by sortm. It would be
>>given 2 arguments, full path names of messages.
>
>Are you suggesting that it be fork()ed and exec()d for each message (as
>opposed to have a long-running program that gets executed just once per
>sorm invocation)?
>
>
Yes, I was thinking of of a fork/exec for each message pair, for which
sortm wanted a comparison.
> If so, it occurs to me that it would be simpler to
> just make the > < decision based on the exit code of the process.
I should have said that the specifications I gave were to illustrate the
functionality I was requesting, leaving the actual specifications to my
betters. The variation you propose would make little difference to the author
of the command, which would usually be a script.
On the other hand, the idea, of using a non-zero exit code for a non-failure,
spooks me, for largely irrational reasons.
Norman Shapiro
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
