Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!dimacs.rutgers.edu!seismo!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!tll
From: tll@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Tal Lewis Lancaster)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: >2.0 Command Line limit (Was: Help...Children Process)
Message-ID: <1991Feb7.200500.6693@nntp-server.caltech.edu>
Date: 7 Feb 91 20:05:00 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Lines: 52


andy finkel writes		{uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy

[Stuff deleted]

   
>Execute() under 1.3 or 2.0 is sync.
>And for compatibility, you can't get return codes :-(

>System() under 2.0 can be sync or async, your choice.  And, if
>used sync style, you can even get return codes passed back from
>the program.

>>Does anybody know the string length limit for the 2.0 System() call?  Is it the
>>same as a CLI command 256?

>The limit is currently 512 characters.  We almost made it unlimited,
>but ran into compatibility problems with some 3rd party products
>that know too much about dos for their own good.

You should have went ahead and made it unlimited!  We all should be aware
of the dangers of writing programs that depend on knowing the internal
structure.  They change and so should the programs that use this knowledge.

t
The lack of this feature troubles me greatly and is one of many things
that keeps productivity on the Amiga down and unsafe.  I know of several cases where
the Amiga has crashed and even corrupted hard-drives because of this
command line limit.

For example using Lattice/SAS's LMK is one example where I have crashed the system
and hard-drive because a command line was too long.  True, SAS could modify
LMK to not do this.  For instance, AZTEC's solution is to just ignore the
shell entirely which prevents their tools from being make resident :(
Why should they be forced to put out "dangerous" or inferior software? 

My point is they shouldn't have to.  This is an OS issue 
and should be handled by the OS.  They have enough problems trying to make
their products work and shouldn't be bothered to come up with some hack
to allow for >256 (or 512) commands being passed to their programs.

>I have a plan to handle that which may get put in sometime in the future,
>though.
How about REAL soon???


>		andy
>-- 
>andy finkel		{uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy
>Commodore-Amiga, Inc.

Tal Lancaster