> I simply asked a question. You provided an answer. > Whose undies are in a bunch here?
As did I. Sorry I misinterpreted your tone. > Wouldn't it be much more > "stylistic" and clear to simply point directly at the Perl you insist > on > using? Or did you really mean you are putting /usr/bin/perl in there > to appear to be portable? That sort of answer I'd understand... except you > have already stated that you don't care about portability. It is my opinion that it looks better. I'm sorry you disagree. > > Seriously, are you trying to attack me or understand the problem? I > am > > trying to be nice, I already apologized for my behavior earlier. > My opinion on this situation does not require that I'm your friend. I am not asking for friendship, just civility. > And it's an answer of confusion. If I were to work on your script I > would see /usr/bin/perl and think "Great. He's using a standard perl > and > I should be able to easily use this under Linux or Cygwin's perl, etc. > Wait... Err... No... He's symlinked this to ActiveState!" and would be > scratching my head wondering why you attempted to appear "Unix-like" > with the shebang line yet are using a proprietary perl.... My scripts will not leave this computer. I have absolutely no intention of sharing any of my code. The only person who has to understand it is me. I'm sorry it confused you. > I know you said you want to use Win32 stuff but there's Win32 stuff > that > you could use in Cygwin too. If you really like Linux style paths, use > Windows and Cygwin, seem to exert full control of the environment I > would think using Cygwin's Perl, where you can more easily use Linux > style paths not only for shebang but more conveniently throughout your > script, would be something you'd want to do... Agreed. In the long term it may happen, but not at this moment. > BTW you never answered the question of what happens in ActiveState when > you call setsid. I'll answer it for you. It returns "Not implemented on > this platform" or something like that. IOW ActiveState does not > implement nor support calling setsid. Why would you want setsid? It's > useful in writing daemons, something I do on occasion. Along with that > ActiveState doesn't seem to handle signals well. Forgive me here my > memory is hazy as I had worked on this problem several years ago. I was > attempting to write a daemon that would be essentially a Windows > service > and wanted it to be a multi threaded server meaning I wanted to fork > and > exec copies of myself to handle incoming requests. This requires proper > signal handling. I was having problems with this so I queried in > ActiveState forums and the guy responsible for signals in ActiveState > responded that Windows doesn't support signals very well! > > Back to Cygwin's Perl I could call setsid as well as wrote a little > test > program that set, sent and trapped all 30 or so supported signals > without a problem. So much for ActiveState! I will deal with it if an when I need to write a daemon script. Thanks for the information. > You've come in here and asked a question to which you have been given > an > answer. You insist on mixing together to separate distinct technologies > that were not designed to work together where experienced people here > advise that you stop fighting the two use the technologies more in the > way they were intended than in ways they weren't intended. Ah but you > insist on doing it the hard way. "Fine then, have fun with your > problem" > is not an unreasonable nor should it be an unexpected response for you. I have already solved my problem, I will be using Mr. Peshansky's idea. You have been asking me questions ever since, I am simply trying to provide you with answers thereby extending to you the same courtesy others have on this thread. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
