system command

[Dennis Malen]

Mark,

Correction!

This is what I got from your line.

^[&oFvar searchnum=55555;CompileFile(\"260268.cs\");

Please note that there is suppose to be a space between var and search that 
we changes.

Dennis
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fairlight" <fairlite at fairlite.com>
To: <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: system command


> Confusious (Dennis Malen) say:
>> Mark,
>>
>> I tested the processing with the four ////. That did not work. From your
>
> Well, /'s were nowhere in your post.  You had \'s.  I used \'s not /'s.
> Be -exacting-.  This is probably why you run into so many bugs--doing
> things half-heartedly and inaccurately.  At this point I feel no sympathy.
>
>> e-mail it appeared that I was adding the extra "/" when my line needed to
>> add an double quote. So I changed the line in the following manner which
>> also did not work:
>>
>> pa="\\"\\033&oFvar
>> searchnum="{rn{";CompileFile(\\\\"260268.cs\\\\");\\015\\""
>
> That's -not- what I have, nor is it based on what you originally posted. 
> I
> showed you the -exact- two points you needed to adjust.  You adjusted more
> than that.  Apparently you don't understand contextual snippets, so here's
> the complete solution spelled out byte by byte:
>
> Then: 
> le="echo";lg="\"\\033&o";pa="Fvarsearchnum="{"55555"{";CompileFile(\\\\"260268.cs\\\\");\\015\" 
>  >/tmp/dennistest"
> Then: system le<lg{pa
>
> That is -EXACTLY- what I have.  Copied and pasted.  No errors, no 
> mistakes,
> and it generates what you first said you wanted.  Assuming what you said
> you wanted is even correct, which I give a 50/50 chance at this stage.
>
>> Mark, I just saw your last e-mail and wanted to point out I do not have
>> "@once" on 4.8. Perhaps you may want to share what you saw when it was
>> displayed on your system.
>
> You don't -need- @once.  It was an easy way to test it because I basically
> just have to get to that point to have the code run, but it's not
> necessary to make the code work.  The same code will run at any point.
>
> For me, this thread is dead.  I've already given you the answer that I've
> proven works on a *nix system, and am unwilling to bother spending more
> time reading inaccurate and imcomplete failure reports when the problem is
> solved, IMHO.  If you won't use the answer provided, why should I waste my
> time trying to provide more help?  Short answer: no good reason.  All I 
> end
> up doing is feeling like my time is being wasted.  Bugger that.  Stick a
> fork in, you're done as far as I'm concerned.
>
> "Good luck--you'll need it." --Smash TV
>
> mark->  -- Willing to help those that will also help themselves.
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>
>
>