On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:52:53PM +0200, Philipp T?lke wrote:
> Marcel Linden wrote:
> >
> > Exactly that is the point. Because & sends a task to the background, I
> > exspected that fvwmscript would wait if I don't append &. But it doesn't.
Um... I haven't tried this out, but, isn't the deal with Do { foo }
that it sends command "foo" to FVWM for interpretation?
That would mean that Do { Exec } runs asynchronously because the FVWM command
Exec runs async. Look a it like that and you'd not expect Do{Exec} to hang.
If you supply an & to the command it has no effect, or at least none noticable
to fvwm. You could argue that the & in the manual is a bug in the
documentation.
Do { PipeRead } does what you want from FVWM, but I have a feeling that
FVWM would wait while the FvwmScript continued on it's merry way. It's to
do with how the module protocol works.
If I were you, I think I'd look at GetOutput, which has to wait for
command completion since it has to parse the command output. If that still
doesn't do it then you'll need to look at the A COMMUNICATION PROTOCOL section
of the manual and write a backend script. But I reckon GetOutput will
do what you want.
