Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!emory!gatech!ncsuvx!mcnc!wolves!deepthot!Jay From: Jay@deepthot.UUCP (Jay Denebeim) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: HELP with Independant Children Processes Message-ID: Date: 8 Feb 91 05:39:16 GMT References: <1991Feb4.171549.28531@nntp-server.caltech.edu> <18606@cbmvax.commodore.com> Organization: The Software Distillery Lines: 28 In article <18606@cbmvax.commodore.com> andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel) writes: > >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. Arrggg... Andy, take a look at the autodocs then, I read 'em before making my post. They sound like its the other way In exec 'requires RUN to be in C:' made me think it was async, System returns the return code, which made me think it was sync... By the way, you can't have return code and async can you? >-- >andy finkel {uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy >Commodore-Amiga, Inc. -- |_o_o|\\ |. o.| || The Jay Denebeim | . | || Software | o | || Distillery | |// Address: mcnc.org!wolves!deepthot.uucp!jay ====== BBS:(919)-460-7430 VOICE:(919)-460-6934