Re: Future [exec] overhaul

On 7/2/08, Larry McVoy <lm@...> wrote:
>
> why pick a name that is well understood to do one
> thing and have it do another thing?  Kind of in line with your intuitive
> comment below.

Indeed.

> We've been pretty happy with ours even though it doesn't fork /bin/sh.
> And the nice thing is it works when there is no /bin/sh (winblows).

Hmm, a "portable" [system] could spawn /bin/sh -c in unix and cmd /c
in winblows... But I admit this is so trivial to do in script that it
is off-topic for this discussion.

So, I'll accept any name you want for this. Now to the semantics. Any
other ideas, or criticism of the ones I proposed ?

-Alex

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by: SourceForge.net Community Choice Awards: VOTE NOW!
Studies have shown that voting for your favorite open source project,
along with a healthy diet, reduces your potential for chronic lameness
and boredom. Vote Now at http://www.sourceforge.net/community/cca08