In a message dated 1/11/05 4:04:01 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On 1/11/05 2:04 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If I've got a shell() call that executes a unix command that takes awhile > to > > complete (up to 3 minutes), is there a way to give control back to > Revolution > > while it's taking place? > > It depends... do you need to get data back from shell or is it purely an > "execute this command" situation? > > > This is a unix call for imaging drives, but I have figured out a way to route the output from that unix call to a text file. My hope was to somehow have Rev start up the disk imaging call process, get control back immediately, and have Revolution read that text file every 5 seconds to check on the status. It's the "getting control back immediately" part that's presently the problem. Since the same issue occurs when executing the call in Terminal, I know it's not Rev's fault. I guess I could just use some unix advice on sublaunching processes. _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
