Re: [Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

Hi Mariano, hi Thierry, I cannot follow up for a few days but I like Mariano's proposal and I think that it will work. Maybe move the child reaper process to a small OSChildWatcher class and have interested clients (OSP, OSSP, others) subscribe to update notifications. Dave > Hi Thierry. Excelle

Re: [Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

Hi Thierry. Excellent question. For OSSubprocess this is not an issue because I look up by pid in my list of forked children... So if not found I do nothing... At least that's what I remember (away from my machine now). So at worst it would be a performance problem when both loaded. As for osproce

Re: [Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

Hi Mariano, 2018-05-23 19:57 GMT+02:00 Mariano Martinez Peck : > > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 2:46 PM Sean P. DeNigris > wrote: >> >> David T. Lewis wrote >> > FFI based solutions work at a different level of abstraction than >> > VM plugins, and there is a role for both. >> >> Thanks for the cont

Re: [Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 2:46 PM Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > David T. Lewis wrote > > FFI based solutions work at a different level of abstraction than > > VM plugins, and there is a role for both. > > Thanks for the context, David. Now that we understand the different niches, > the main problem is

Re: [Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

David T. Lewis wrote > FFI based solutions work at a different level of abstraction than > VM plugins, and there is a role for both. Thanks for the context, David. Now that we understand the different niches, the main problem is that they can not be loaded in the same image without breaking :/

Re: [Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

Mariano Martinez Peck wrote > From what I understand/remember/believe, the main reasons for > building OSSubprocess were: Thanks, Mariano!! Very informative :) - Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html

Re: [Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

Hi guys, First, I would like to say that David was always very helpful, positive and we have discussed and worked together a lot for this. When I was sponsored to build OSSubprocess I already got the "we would like this have this", so maybe some additional opinion from the ESUG board may help cla

Re: [Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

Guillermo Polito wrote > I try not to depend on projects using OSProcess in that case. That is not exactly a robust solution! What is the only project providing the functionality you need depends on OSP?! Guillermo Polito wrote > I understand that the incompatibilities bother, but putting all th

Re: [Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

Hi Sean On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 9:49 PM, Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > Guillermo Polito wrote > > If you have any issues… > > IMHO the biggest issue is incompatibility with OSProcess. This seems not to > matter when one is loading Project A depending on OSSP in a clean image, > but > the second one

Re: [Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

Guillermo Polito wrote > If you have any issues… IMHO the biggest issue is incompatibility with OSProcess. This seems not to matter when one is loading Project A depending on OSSP in a clean image, but the second one tries to load Project A into an image where Project B already depends on OSP - KA

[Pharo-users] [Ann] OSSubprocess 1.0.0

Hi all, News from the OSSubprocess side. For those who do not know it, OSSubprocess is the library to call external processes from Pharo. These are the main points of this release. - 64bits support - Issues Working on both Pharo 6 and 7 - Issue #34: Adding tests to validate that the return code