From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Sun Oct 30 21:26:21 2005 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Subject: Re: [MiNT] pexit, pwaitpid and return values From: Odd Skancke To: MiNT List In-Reply-To: <1130696192.29858.10.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> References: <1130541303.5390.19.camel@linuxbox> <1130625612.5390.27.camel@linuxbox> <1130696192.29858.10.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:20:14 +0000 Message-Id: <1130710815.5390.29.camel@linuxbox> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-6) X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: ozk@atari.org Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=BAYES_00 X-Spam-Level: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by wh58-902.st.uni-magdeburg.de id j9UKQLo4003686 søn, 30,.10.2005 kl. 12.16 -0600, skrev Evan Langlois: > On Sat, 2005-10-29 at 22:40 +0000, Odd Skancke wrote: > > You didnt comment on what you think about the existing dilemma we have > > here, regarding Pexec() vs. pwait() and friends return codes? There is > > inconsistency here now! > > Did you see my comment on this? It may not have any impact on MiNTLib, > other than the desired capability would be possible, plus some > additional functionality, and you can clean up any existing hacks or 8 > bit values. If you mean me, yes I did see those. But I feel like I'm on thin ice regarding this, I have never used any of the calls in question here and dont dare to change anything whithout being 100% sure. Odd Skancke