[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference hydra::amiga_v1

Title:AMIGA NOTES
Notice:Join us in the *NEW* conference - HYDRA::AMIGA_V2
Moderator:HYDRA::MOORE
Created:Sat Apr 26 1986
Last Modified:Wed Feb 05 1992
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:5378
Total number of notes:38326

1252.0. "AUTOMATIC "EXECUTE"" by POLAR::GOSLING (KANATA MFG I.S.) Wed Mar 16 1988 09:12

       I hate having to type "execute" in front of a batch file to get it
       going.  What I would like to be able to do is to enter the name of
       the batch file and have it execute automatically - similar to the
       way a ".bat" file on an MSDOS system is handled.
       
       I envision that what is necessary would be a utility that you load
       up at startup and sits around in background waiting for you to
       enter a file name.  When you do so, it reads the file name and
       searches for it (with the extension ".bat") in the current
       directory and devices and/or directories you specified in your
       Path setup.  If it finds it, it executes it along with any
       parameters that my have been supplied - just as if you had entered
       "execute filename.bat param1 ... paramX".  If it can't find it, it
       would pass control to AmigaDos, which treats it as an executable
       (if it is), or returns the messages "not an object file" message
       (if it isn't), or "file not found" if it can't be found at all.
       
       I know that using Steve's Shell would allow me to set up aliases
       to accomplish this, but it means that for every new ".bat" script
       created, an alias would need to be created (and unaliased if the
       script is deleted).  Besides this would not help those who don't
       have the memory or disk space to run or accomodate Shell.
       
       Has seen or heard of such a utility and/or care to comment?
       
       Art
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name		DateLines
1252.1XICON?LEDS::ACCIARDIWed Mar 16 1988 09:345
    I think XICON will do just what you want.  You can make self running
    batch files execute from a tool icon.  I played around with it a
    while back, but I forgot exactly how it works.  Anyone have a copy
    on the net?
1252.2.shCOUGAR::SMCAFEESteve McAfeeWed Mar 16 1988 10:0510
    re: .0
        
    Steve's Shell will automatically source files in this way if they
    end in a ".sh".  No need for "alias" or "execute" or "source".

    Maybe we could get the "sh" put into an environment variable so that
    people could use ".com", ".bat" or whatever they want. 
        
    - steve m.
1252.3THANKSPOLAR::GOSLINGKANATA MFG I.S.Wed Mar 16 1988 12:1112
       There is just so much information out there, it is hard to keep
       track....
       
       Thanks for the input - I do have XICON (along with a million other
       programs that I have no idea what they do) and should have reread
       the Shell documentation.
       
       Thanks again.
       
       Art
1252.4xicon for the WB, not CLIMVCAD3::BAEDERD. Scott DTN 237-2961 SHR1-3/E19Wed Mar 16 1988 17:264
    although I though xicon was only for WB (ie icon based environment),
    not the CLI....but shell should do the trick
    
    scott.
1252.5Keep it Simple...WINNER::JBERNARDJohn Bernard YWO/292-2591Thu Mar 17 1988 08:4015
    Another option, although simplistic, is to copy C:EXECUTE to C:@.
    Then all you have to do is type
    
    @ comfile
    
    If you shove all your command files in S:, it'll find them whereever
    you are.  This also makes the transition from the VAX during the
    day to amy at night a bit easier.
    
    By the way Amy needs a space between the "@" and filename and VMS
    will accept a space.  I got in the habit of always using a space,
    so the transition is quite transparent from VMS to AmigaDOS.
    
    john
1252.6 POLAR::GOSLINGKANATA MFG I.S.Thu Mar 17 1988 09:5518
       re: .4
       
       Scott, your right wrt xicon.  Although I haven't put it to the
       test, after reading the docs, it appears that it allows you to
       attach a script to an ICON, which, when double-clicked, executes
       it.  As I'm not an ICON user for the most part, the Shell solution
       appears to be more applicable to my usage needs.
       
       re: .5
       
       John, the @ suggestion is a good one - at least I can relate to
       it.
       
       Thanks again
       
       Art