Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > Wrapping existing UNIX commands in C

Reply
Thread Tools

Wrapping existing UNIX commands in C

 
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
tom st denis <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Aug 2, 6:03*pm, Keith Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> tom st denis <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>
>> > On Aug 2, 10:16*am, (E-Mail Removed) (Kenny McCormack)
>> > wrote:

>> [snip]
>> > Nobody is questioning your devotion to the C language. *They're
>> > questioning if you know the name on the door you walked through.

>>
>> Please don't feed the troll.

>
>Never hurts to check in once in a while and see if there is any
>humanity behind the account.


Leader Kiki is not going to be happy with your attitude, sir!

--
Windows 95 n. (Win-doze): A 32 bit extension to a 16 bit user interface for
an 8 bit operating system based on a 4 bit architecture from a 2 bit company
that can't stand 1 bit of competition.

Modern day upgrade --> Windows XP Professional x64: Windows is now a 64 bit
tweak of a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit user interface for an 8 bit
operating system based on a 4 bit architecture from a 2 bit company that
can't stand 1 bit of competition.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Keith Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2012
tom st denis <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> On Aug 2, 6:03┬*pm, Keith Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> tom st denis <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>
>> > On Aug 2, 10:16┬*am, (E-Mail Removed) (Kenny McCormack)
>> > wrote:

>> [snip]
>> > Nobody is questioning your devotion to the C language. ┬*They're
>> > questioning if you know the name on the door you walked through.

>>
>> Please don't feed the troll.

>
> Never hurts to check in once in a while and see if there is any
> humanity behind the account.


Can't you do that without giving him public attention?

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Chicken McNuggets
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2012
On 03/08/2012 05:07, Keith Thompson wrote:

> Can't you do that without giving him public attention?


Wow. It seems like I have really ****ed off the regulars here with my
question. In the future I'll know to ask in comp.unix.programmers with
any POSIX related questions I might have.

I really didn't mean to start a huge flame war I was simply asking for
some help and originally thought that this was the best place to ask for
said help. I'm sorry that this thread got out of hand.

Having said that I did receive an answer to my question which I am
grateful for.

So you have made your point and as I said in future I'll know to keep to
standard C when asking questions here.

Thank you all.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Keith Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2012
Chicken McNuggets <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> On 03/08/2012 05:07, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Can't you do that without giving him public attention?

>
> Wow. It seems like I have really ****ed off the regulars here with my
> question. In the future I'll know to ask in comp.unix.programmers with
> any POSIX related questions I might have.


No, you really haven't. You made a minor mistake, and you've
acknowledged it. No harm done. The flame war had nothing to do
with you, and is in no way your fault. In particular, my remark
upthread about not feeding the troll was *not* in reference to you.

[snip]

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) (E-Mail Removed) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Heinrich Wolf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2012
Hi,

I do not mind your question. And I do not restrict a C forum to only Windows
OS. I still believe, that C covers both Linux, Windows and more. So I am
glad that I could point you to popen. I neither interpreted your question
for only using ls. For me it was clearly readable that this was just an
example. It may be hard to code all in C, maybe especially when you need a
suid bit for running it. Why bother with security issues, when reading a
pipe does the job.

Heiner

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2012
In article <jvits4$1u2$(E-Mail Removed)-online.net>,
Heinrich Wolf <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I do not mind your question. And I do not restrict a C forum to only Windows
>OS. I still believe, that C covers both Linux, Windows and more. So I am
>glad that I could point you to popen. I neither interpreted your question
>for only using ls. For me it was clearly readable that this was just an
>example. It may be hard to code all in C, maybe especially when you need a
>suid bit for running it. Why bother with security issues, when reading a
>pipe does the job.
>
>Heiner
>


Yes, I totally agree that C should not be seen as limited to Windows.

In fact, it runs on, and has been ported to, many non-Windows OSes. This is
a Good Thing.

--
The motto of the GOP "base": You can't be a billionaire, but at least you
can vote like one.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Keith Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2012
"Heinrich Wolf" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> I do not mind your question. And I do not restrict a C forum to only Windows
> OS. I still believe, that C covers both Linux, Windows and more. So I am
> glad that I could point you to popen. I neither interpreted your question
> for only using ls. For me it was clearly readable that this was just an
> example. It may be hard to code all in C, maybe especially when you need a
> suid bit for running it. Why bother with security issues, when reading a
> pipe does the job.


Yes, but there's an entire newsgroup, comp.unix.programmer, dedicated
to programming under Unix and Unix-like operating systems.

The C language doesn't mention popen(). Unix does, and
comp.unix.programmer is full of people who know more about it than
even a C expert is likely to know.

My point is simply that comp.unix.programmer is a better place
for such questions than comp.lang.c, for at least two reasons.
First, you're more likely to get knowledgeable answers in c.u.p.,
which will be read by other experts who are going to be able to
point out any errors. And second, it lets clc focus on what it's
best at: discussing the C language as defined by the standard;
there isn't a better newsgroup for that.

And yet some people (I'm not referring either to you or to the OP)
take great offense at that, or pretend to.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) (E-Mail Removed) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Nick Keighley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-05-2012
On Aug 4, 11:34*am, "Heinrich Wolf" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I do not mind your question. And I do not restrict a C forum to only Windows
> OS.


nor does anyone else. The point is *both* Unix and Windows specific
questions are off-topic.


> I still believe, that C covers both Linux, Windows and more. So I am
> glad that I could point you to popen. I neither interpreted your question
> for only using ls. For me it was clearly readable that this was just an
> example. It may be hard to code all in C, maybe especially when you need a
> suid bit for running it. Why bother with security issues, when reading a
> pipe does the job.


 
Reply With Quote
 
gwowen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2012
On Aug 5, 11:27*am, Nick Keighley <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
> On Aug 4, 11:34*am, "Heinrich Wolf" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > I do not mind your question. And I do not restrict a C forum to only Windows
> > OS.

>
> nor does anyone else. The point is *both* Unix and Windows specific
> questions are off-topic.


So it is repeatedly claimed. Such repitition aside, I don't see any
evidence that that is actually the case.

All that is clear (to me, at least) is that a significant minority of
regular posters are happy to answer such questions, while a separate
minority are vociferous that they not even be asked.
 
Reply With Quote
 
James Kuyper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-06-2012
On 08/06/2012 04:50 AM, gwowen wrote:
> On Aug 5, 11:27´┐Żam, Nick Keighley <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:

....
>> nor does anyone else. The point is *both* Unix and Windows specific
>> questions are off-topic.

>
> So it is repeatedly claimed. Such repitition aside, I don't see any
> evidence that that is actually the case.


Questions of topicality are hard to resolve for a newsgroup first
created before it became conventional for newsgroups to have charters.
That's why I normally phrase my comments on such subjects in terms of
where the best place is to get answers to such questions. I hope you
would not seriously argue against the proposition that a forum specific
to a given operating system is generally a better place to go to than
clc for answers to questions that are specific to that operating system?

> All that is clear (to me, at least) is that a significant minority of
> regular posters are happy to answer such questions, while a separate
> minority are vociferous that they not even be asked.


There's a key word missing from that last sentence. We believe that such
questions should not be asked HERE. We think it would be a great idea to
ask such questions in a different forum where they're more likely to be
answered promptly and correctly.

My personal judgment is that the number of people who answer such
questions is significantly smaller than the number of people who
vociferously object to telling anyone that there's better forums to go
to for answers to those kinds of questions. Those people almost never
provide an actual answer to the question being asked, they just, for
some reason, want the existence of such forums to be kept a secret.
--
James Kuyper
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
enhancing/wrapping an existing instance of a duck Neville Dempsey Python 1 09-01-2008 06:27 PM
Adding a timeout to commands by wrapping + thread - suggestions? dduck Java 11 09-04-2007 12:34 PM
wrapping existing instance in new interface insyte@gmail.com Python 1 11-15-2006 11:25 PM
Need Help Differentiating Bad Commands From Incomplete Commands Tim Stanka Python 1 08-02-2004 02:08 AM
Re: man pages for C commands (GCC commands) Ben Pfaff C Programming 4 06-28-2003 06:21 PM



Advertisments