Can I have a straw poll of users who'd find console output for spawned process useful while the parent ANT process still lives?
I think I might have a change that's about 10 lines to alleviate the problem of reparenting Process I/O - it's working great for me on Windows and Linux. If people want it I'll start a discussion over on the developers list... The other thing is that while Execute is explicity closing the Process output stream, I don't see why this makes the situation any safer while leaving the Process input and error streams open and hence attached to the ANT JVM - what happens if spawned Process is trying to draw input when the ANT JVM terminates? This seems to be best sorted by shutdown hooks closing streams instead. If the JVM is terminating and the shutdown hooks don't get run for some reason then the situation is already so bad that worrying about whether streams are going to be detached gracefully is the least of our worries. -----Original Message----- From: Matt Benson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 August 2004 17:46 To: Ant Users List Subject: Re: Console output for exec AFAIK this functionality was originally included in the submission to handle Process I/O in the basic way it is handled today. The best I can reconstruct it after the fact, there was concern about inconsistencies of what happens when the I/O of a spawned process is tied to the JVM but the process then outlives the JVM. So in short, the code to do what you ask has been explicitly removed from Ant at some point in the past. HTH, Matt --- Tim Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Boys and Girls > > For those of you who think about these things, is > there any god reason why > the System.out and System.err of processes that are > spawned by <exec> when > spawn="true" aren't reparented to the main ANT > process's? > > I wrote a <spawn> task pre-1.6, which was basically > a hack of <exec> with > the waiting for the termination of the stream from > the child process > removed. > > I'm happy to try and re-fit this to 1.6.2 and submit > a patch, but before I > do it can anyone think of why this would be a > fundamentally wrong thing to > do? > > Tim > > Allustra Limited > 85 Gracechurch Street > London > EC3V 0AA > Tel +44 (0)20 7469 8640 > Fax +44 (0)20 7469 8689 > http://www.allustra.com/ > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
