Good lord, if I had known my complaints would have spawned this sort of
debate, I'd have kept quiet once I was shown the "Exec exec" syntax.
> While we're at it, let's make the second parameter "exec" if we want
> ExecLite, and just use ExecClassic as the default for exec. So:
>
> Exec xterm
>
> is ExecClassic, and
>
> Exec exec xterm
>
> is ExecLite. Wait a minute! It already does this! How quaint.
>
> My point is, we don't really need FVWM to fool around with the shell
> command string, by addings "exec"'s and such. It's just asking for
> trouble. However, I would support a new command ("Execv" sounds good)
> that would be Bob's ExecQuick - just fork and exec directly, doing no
> parsing of the command line other than to split args on whitespace.
This message best mirrors my own feelings. First off, we should do absolutely
*nothing* to Exec. To alter it would threaten the existing rc files of the
entire fvwm2 user base.
All I had suggested was a faster, lighter Execv keyword. I had no intention of
leading this topic into a triple of new keywords, new syntax, etc. Anymore, I
would be content if the docs just pointed out Exec exec as the solution to
avoiding the intermediate shell.
Randy
--
===============================================================================
Randy J. Ray -- U S WEST Technologies IAD/CSS/DPDS Phone: (303)595-2869
Denver, CO rjray_at_uswest.com
"It's not denial. I'm just very selective about the reality I accept." --Calvin
===============================================================================
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to majordomo_at_hpc.uh.edu.
To report problems, send mail to fvwm-owner_at_hpc.uh.edu.
Received on Mon Apr 07 1997 - 13:08:41 BST