[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       vim-mac
Subject:    forking in OS X (Jaguar)
From:       Benji Fisher <benji () member ! AMS ! org>
Date:       2003-02-11 21:48:47
[Download RAW message or body]

Gregory Seidman wrote:
> Benji Fisher sez:
> 
> }      If I run vim in the background, with
> } 
> } % /Applications/vim/Vim.app/Contents/MacOS/Vim -g &
> } 
> } then the Terminal is ready for new commands, and Vim comes into focus, 
> } which is what I usually want.  If I do not run it in the background,
> 
> But you shouldn't need the &, it should Just Do It. This is the expected
> behavior withou the -f flag.
> 
> } % /Applications/vim/Vim.app/Contents/MacOS/Vim -g
> } 
> } then the terminal waits for Vim to finish.  Is this different from not 
> } forking?  More to the point:  is there a problem?  For example, I have 
> } not tried calling Vim from a mail program or anything that expects Vim 
> } to finish before doing more work.
> 
> This is exactly not forking. This is the expected behavior with the -f
> flag.

      That's what I thought.  So we have the same options (fork and 
don't fork) but we get them in a strange way (with or without & instead 
of without or with -f).  My question stands:  is this a problem?

      Since my attempt to get gvim, view, etc. by making (symbolic or 
hard) links failed, perhaps we should go back to my original suggestion. 
  With appropriate aliases or shell-script wrappers, we should be able 
to get the expected behavior by using or not using -f .  That is, make 
gvim a little executable shell script that processes the -f flag (and 
appends & or not) and passes the rest of the arguments to MacOS/Vim .

					--Benji Fisher

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]