Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!elroy!gryphon!pnet02!ddave
From: ddave@pnet02.cts.com (David Donley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: I wanna have a DOSGate!
Message-ID: <16344@gryphon.COM>
Date: 2 Jun 89 00:40:34 GMT
Sender: news@gryphon.COM
Organization: People-Net [pnet02], Redondo Beach, CA.
Lines: 45

bmacintyre@watcgl.waterloo.edu (Blair MacIntyre) writes:
>In article <16317@gryphon.COM> ddave@pnet02.cts.com (David Donley) writes:
>>peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>>>In article <1989May28.171344.4525@ziebmef.uucp>, mcp@ziebmef.uucp (Marc Plumb) writes:
>>>> In article <16031@gryphon.COM> ddave@pnet02.cts.com (David Donley) writes:
>>>> >How can I fake normal standard programs into sending their stdio into
>>>> >my BBS code?
>>>> Write a DOS handler.
>>>What's wrong with using a PIPE: type of device?
>>I can't use a pipe, the BBS must handle many events, it can't just wait for
>>data to come from a file.
>
>
>Well being as this is a multitasking computer ( you remember, we brag about
>it all the time! ) why not write a little program that reads a file and
>sends the appropriate message ( whatever that is ) to your BBS.
>
>Then, you just redirect your output to a pipe: and read the pipe: with
>that program.  I'm assuming that you know what kind of messages it is
>you want to send, so this should be trivial ...
>
>A DOS handler seems a bit extreme in this case.  I'm personally into the
>"use existing tools" mentality that Peter ( I assume ) is into too, judging 
>by his suggestion to use a pipe:
>
>Blair
>-- 
>= Blair MacIntyre, bmacintyre@watcgl.{waterloo.edu, UWaterloo.ca}          // =
>=   now appearing at the Computer Graphics Lab, U of Waterloo!           \X/  =
>= "There's nothing the matter with BR that a shot gun blast wouldn't fix" cge =
>= "It's not my fault, fatboy!" - Felder, pilot of TL Student Driver On Board  =


Ya know, that's a good idea there!  But if I can find out how to do it
otherwise, I probably will, I hate programs with tons and tons of tiny files
(Workbench comes to mind) and also programs with tons and tons of tasks (All
of which have lots of overhead) Also, I don't want to have to depend on
somebody having a certain pipe, so I'll have to have all the filenames
user-configable, and then I have to depend on people setting it up right... 
It is definatly something to consider though...  After all, a handler process
will probably take up more RAM than a little reporter for the main program... 
:-)

                    Call the Bug Eyes BBS at (213) 372-4494
     ddave@pnet02.CTS.COM                      killer!gryphon!pnet02!ddave