I've got some code like this:
sources = File.new 'file_list.txt'
sources.each do |src|
exec "mkdir #{some_dest}" unless File.exists some_dest
exec "svn export #{src} #{some_dest}"
end
puts 'Done.'
The problem is that ruby calls 'svn export' once for the first line of sources and exits without looping through subsequent sources or getttng to the line "puts 'Done.'"
exec works just fine with the "mkdir" call.
A couple of things:
1. I'm on Windows Server 2003
2. svn (Subversion) 1.3
3. I'm not using the rscm gem with it's subversion interface because I need to export and rscm doesn't appear to do this (maybe I'll see about adding it)
Any ideas why a call to svn wouldn't return control to my ruby script?
···
--
Craig Beck
http://www.luckybonza.com
AIM: kreiggers
I'm not a windows guy so I don't know exactly how exec is interpreted on Windows, but on the Unix side:
exec causes the currently running program (i.e. Ruby) to be replaced with the new command.
Your "svn" command doesn't run because the first exec effectively replaced the Ruby interpreter with
"mkdir". Sort of like invasion of the body-snatchers. First the process is running Ruby and then it
is running "mkdir" and Ruby is gone.
The Unix idiom to handle what you want to do is to call fork first to create a child process and then
have the child process be replaced with the command via 'exec'. Rinse and repeat.
In your case, you might be better off using 'system' instead of 'exec'. System will take care of
forking and exec'ing the command for you.
Gary Wright
···
On Jun 20, 2006, at 12:27 AM, Craig Beck wrote:
I've got some code like this:
sources = File.new 'file_list.txt'
sources.each do |src|
exec "mkdir #{some_dest}" unless File.exists some_dest
exec "svn export #{src} #{some_dest}"
end
puts 'Done.'
The problem is that ruby calls 'svn export' once for the first line of sources and exits without looping through subsequent sources or getttng to the line "puts 'Done.'"
exec works just fine with the "mkdir" call.
A couple of things:
1. I'm on Windows Server 2003
you should be use 'system' instead of 'exec'.
look like this,
system 'dir'
or
`dir`
both ok.
···
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
because 'exec' will replace the current process by running the given
external command.so
exec 'dir'
# never get here
u know?
you can type 'ri exec' @ shell for more..
enjoy
···
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Great!
system did the trick
between php, ruby, linux and mac osx at home, c# and windows at work I have a hard time switching modes and remembering which is which.
···
On Jun 19, 2006, at 10:26 PM, gwtmp01@mac.com wrote:
On Jun 20, 2006, at 12:27 AM, Craig Beck wrote:
I've got some code like this:
sources = File.new 'file_list.txt'
sources.each do |src|
exec "mkdir #{some_dest}" unless File.exists some_dest
exec "svn export #{src} #{some_dest}"
end
puts 'Done.'
The problem is that ruby calls 'svn export' once for the first line of sources and exits without looping through subsequent sources or getttng to the line "puts 'Done.'"
exec works just fine with the "mkdir" call.
A couple of things:
1. I'm on Windows Server 2003
I'm not a windows guy so I don't know exactly how exec is interpreted on Windows, but on the Unix side:
exec causes the currently running program (i.e. Ruby) to be replaced with the new command.
Your "svn" command doesn't run because the first exec effectively replaced the Ruby interpreter with
"mkdir". Sort of like invasion of the body-snatchers. First the process is running Ruby and then it
is running "mkdir" and Ruby is gone.
The Unix idiom to handle what you want to do is to call fork first to create a child process and then
have the child process be replaced with the command via 'exec'. Rinse and repeat.
In your case, you might be better off using 'system' instead of 'exec'. System will take care of
forking and exec'ing the command for you.
Gary Wright
--
Craig Beck
http://www.luckybonza.com
AIM: kreiggers
