Re: Reaped pid = 24793, status = 0

2001-04-26 Thread Christoph Kukulies
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 05:30:41PM +0200, Ralph Einfeldt wrote: > Process mProcess = > Runtime.getRuntime().exec(new String[] {, [, arg1-n]}); > > BufferedReader mInput = new BufferedReader(new > InputStreamReader(mProcess.getInputStream())); > > String mLine; > while ((mLine = mInput.readLi

Re: Reaped pid = 24793, status = 0

2001-04-25 Thread Christoph Kukulies
Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > > Von: Christoph Kukulies [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 25. April 2001 09:45 > > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Betreff: Re: Reaped pid = 24793, status = 0 > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:2

Re: Reaped pid = 24793, status = 0

2001-04-25 Thread Christoph Kukulies
out.println("some exception occured [" + e + "]"); e.printStackTrace(); } > > > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > > Von: Christoph Kukulies [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 25. April 2001 09:07 > > An: [EMAIL PROTE

Re: Reaped pid = 24793, status = 0

2001-04-24 Thread Christoph Kukulies
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 12:54:56PM -0400, Boyce, David wrote: > A guess: you're letting the object reference go out of scope without doing a > waitFor() or similar. When it then gets garbage collected the JVM tells you > what became of your abandoned child. So should I do a WaitFor(p) (the proces

RE: Reaped pid = 24793, status = 0

2001-04-24 Thread Boyce, David
A guess: you're letting the object reference go out of scope without doing a waitFor() or similar. When it then gets garbage collected the JVM tells you what became of your abandoned child. -David Boyce -Original Message- From: Christoph Kukulies [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday,