-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/37336/#review95658
-----------------------------------------------------------


In the same vein as os::shell, we should probably introduce an 'os' namespace 
in libprocess for asynchronous os utilities. In this case, process::os::shell 
which returns a Future of the output (although, ideally <status, output, 
error>).

- Ben Mahler


On Aug. 15, 2015, 2:02 a.m., Marco Massenzio wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/37336/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Aug. 15, 2015, 2:02 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and Joris Van Remoortere.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-3035
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3035
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Jira: MESOS-3035
> 
> The original API for `process::Subprocess` still left a lot of legwork
> to do for the caller; we have now added a `wait(Duration timeout)` method
> that returns a `CommandResult` (also introduced with this patch) which
> contains useful information about the command invocation; the exit code;
> stdout and, optionally, stderr too.
> 
> The `wait()` method will wait for both the process to terminate, and
> stdout/stderr to be available to read from; it also "unpacks" them into
> ready-to-use `string`s.
> 
> This is still WIP as I'm seeing some unusual behavior and I'd like to discuss 
> with someone more expert on libprocess.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/subprocess.hpp 
> 310cb4f8e4e2faa5545dffd196d7490c868bc5d6 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/subprocess.cpp 
> d6ea62ed1c914d34e0e189395831c86fff8aac22 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/subprocess_tests.cpp 
> ab7515325e5db0a4fd222bb982f51243d7b7e39d 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37336/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Marco Massenzio
> 
>

Reply via email to