Re: Still Not sure if I agree with myself.

2003-09-12 Thread fliptop
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 at 14:13, drieux opined: [snip] d: sub should { defined($REQ_PARAMS->{$_[0]}); } d: d: sub doDaemon { d: d: } d: sub kickDaemon { $me=shift; $me->doDaemon(@_); } d: # the synonym trick... d: d:Which still gives me a HASH to m

allow CGI to write on my HDD

2003-09-12 Thread Jean-Baptiste.Claude
Hi, My cgi script has been written in order to collect some parameters (with the POST method) but actually if I want to record them, I can just put them in a pre-existent file. I am unable to create a new file, even with a 'chmod 777' on my directory... I would have a result like this: #tes

RE: allow CGI to write on my HDD

2003-09-12 Thread Bob Showalter
Jean-Baptiste.Claude wrote: > Hi, > My cgi script has been written in order to collect some parameters > (with the POST method) but actually if I want to record them, I can > just put them in a pre-existent file. I am unable to create a new > file, even with a 'chmod 777' on my directory... > I wou

Want CGI script to test and start daemon - was Re: CGI problem, please help

2003-09-12 Thread drieux
On Friday, Sep 12, 2003, at 00:47 US/Pacific, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sergey, ah, I see, you are new to the Ungainly Art, of not only programming, which you are doing well in, but the more Arcane art of Daemonology. So bear with me while I try to write some 'back and fill' here. A part of the p

WE: allow CGI to write on my HDD

2003-09-12 Thread Babale Fongo
Your conditional statement may be causing the problem. If your if-statement return false, your output file will not be created; so you can't write into it. If you want to see whether the file exist, then use: If (! -e $name){ open (OUT, ">$name");} > Hi, > My cgi script has been written i

Re: Still Not sure if I agree with myself.

2003-09-12 Thread Todd W.
"Drieux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > This discussion goes along with the one you are having with fliptop. > > One of my first question is - why the 'closure' eg: > > { > package FOO; > > } > > Or is that simply to make 'clear' that outside of > the Closure

Re: Still Not sure if I agree with myself.

2003-09-12 Thread drieux
On Friday, Sep 12, 2003, at 18:54 US/Pacific, Todd W. wrote: [..] I dont think you can call that a closure yet. You would have to be defining subroutines that refer to lexical variables outside of the subroutine or something along those lines: [EMAIL PROTECTED] trwww]$ perl { my $dog = 'spot