hi,
did you consider using netsend/netreceive in your patches, i use them to cummunicate with Apache's CGIS and it's stable.
for some other reason, one might want what you ask.
for instance, if you want to open a connection to a database and keep a cache of fetched datas ( in php, perl or whatever, ... )
cheers,
yves
Bo.T wrote:
Hi all,
since i seem to have the usual habit of asking questions that no one else knows the answer to either, i thought i'D ask an easy one.
can the ggee shell external start a process (via a shell script) that keeps going?
I keep trying it and it does not want to work, the ps aux command gives [pd <defunct>], which seems to correspond to the nonrunning process that I am trying to run.
for those interested, i am trying to get PD to start a script that used pdsend and pdreceive objects to act as an interface for the PD process to other programs. I would like to be able to do this so I can have a little local patch that I call up with unique port numbers as arguments and they will be used for communication between the main PD patch and the external programs. Doing all this by hand is a pain in the bum.
Hope someone can tell me, or tell me that it is not possible. I thought i had seen this on the list, but cannot find it anymore :-<
chrz,
tm
morning,
Bo.T wrote:
Hi all,
since i seem to have the usual habit of asking questions that no one else knows the answer to either, i thought i'D ask an easy one.
can the ggee shell external start a process (via a shell script) that keeps going?
I keep trying it and it does not want to work, the ps aux command gives [pd <defunct>], which seems to correspond to the nonrunning process that I am trying to run.
[snip]
i've had this this problem as well; basically what i'd like is an "interpreter" object that feeds its inlet to stdin and passes stdout to its outlet, 'shell' didn't work for me, either :-(
On 24 May 2002 at 19:24:07, Yves Degoyon wrote:
hi,
did you consider using netsend/netreceive in your patches, i use them to cummunicate with Apache's CGIS and it's stable.
i've tried this too; the thing is, i'm lazy and would like to be able to control the whole complex from within pd; as it is, i have to start the 'netreceive | my-interpreter | netsend' pipeline by hand, which can be a pain in the wazoo.
maybe i'll actually get around to writing such a wrapper once my interpreter gets fixed up a bit ;-)
marmosets, Bryan