Mark Fletcher wrote: > > I understand that "start" means start the process and don't wait until > it exits. That's exactly why I'd like to use it. (I'm not sure why you > say invoking Ant implies using "run" instead of "start". Seems like both > commands should be compatible, depending on whether you want synchronous > or asynchronous behavior.)
No, there is a big difference between command "run" and command "start": command "run" can capture the output of the command (i.e. what's printed on the console) and may be used to tell whether the execution of the process was successful or not (using its exit code). This is in general what I want when I run command-line tools like ant. > But what I'm wondering is why the process takes so long to actually > start running with the "start" command. And as I said, sometimes it > never starts at all. It seems that it's given an extremely low priority > in the system. Is there any way to prioritize it higher? > Command "start" does not tweak the priority of the process it creates and command "start" does not take a long time to launch applications. I used "Tools|Execute Command" on an *old* PC running Windows 2000 to make the following experiments: start notepad ==> less than half a second start "C:\Program Files\Adobe\Acrobat 7.0\Reader\AcroRd32.exe" ==> less than half a second Therefore, I don't think your problems come from XMLmind XML Editor. Are you sure Acrobat Reader is not attempting to upgrade itself? ;-)
