|
From: | Matthew Woehlke |
Subject: | Re: A few man page fixes from RHEL-5 |
Date: | Mon, 04 Feb 2008 14:42:26 -0600 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 |
Andreas Schwab wrote:
Matthew Woehlke <mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> writes:Doesn't 'exec' replace the process? I get the others (I think), but I don't understand what shell is left to "stop execution" after an exec.exec can fail.
D'oh, fail to *do* anything... I was thinking if whatever was exec'd failed :-). Yes, that makes sense, of course.
-- Matthew HIPPOS wallow slightly in the MUDDY RIVER What do you want to do next? > WALLOW IN MUDDY RIVER You join HIPPOS.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |