Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #23552
| From | Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 |
| References | (5 earlier) <ny999ia6dd3p.1a3wp166qwjw4$.dlg@40tude.net> <atgfm1FlhrU2@mid.dfncis.de> <kkv2tq$mki$1@dont-email.me> <athbsoF641fU1@mid.dfncis.de> <kl0hbk$uge$1@dont-email.me> |
| Message-ID | <dHUct.4001$Ep5.2983@newsfe29.iad> (permalink) |
| Organization | Public Usenet Newsgroup Access |
| Date | 2013-04-21 13:43 -0300 |
On 04/21/2013 08:08 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:31:14 +0300, Sven Köhler wrote:
>
>> Am 21.04.2013 00:56, schrieb Martin Gregorie:
>>> Where do you get the two elements bit? My documentation (Java 6
>>> Javadocs)
>>> says you can pass either a List<String> list of items or one or more
>>> Strings. Neither form requires exactly two elements. The only
>>> requirement is that the first element must be the command name and the
>>> rest are the arguments you're passing to it. If you're not looking at
>>> the Javadocs documentation set for the JDK or JRE you using, then
>>> you're working from incorrect information.
>>
>> Start reading from the top of the page:
>> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/lang/ProcessBuilder.html
>>
>> The first bullet points explains, that on some operating systems (e.g.
>> Windows), a valid command exist of exactly two Strings.
>>
> It says *some* operating systems. No mention of Windows. It also says
> "there are operating systems where programs are expected to tokenize
> command line strings themselves" which is not Windows IME - the C, C++
> and Java CLI programming interface is the same for these in UNIX, Linux,
> OS-9 and Windows. There are probably some programming languages/
> environments in which you'd be required to split out the CLI arguments
> yourself (IIRC TAL on a Guardian NonStop system is one), but if you're
> programing in that sort of environment then you'd be familiar with that
> sort of CLI parsing and expect to do it.
>
>> The constructor of ProcessBuilder on the other hand states that it does
>> not check whether the provided list of strings is a valid command.
>>
> Of course. Its perfectly reasonable to expect the OS to determine whether
> the first argument identifies a an executable file - every oyhet language
> system (e.g. all the C standard library exec() functions work that way),
> just as all command line arguments are passed to the called executable
> for validation.
>
> In short, if you've tried something like this:
>
> ProcessBuilder pb = new ProcessBuilder("cmnd.exe", "arg1", "arg2",
> "arg3");
> pb.start();
>
> and it doesn't work, try this:
>
> ProcessBuilder pb = new ProcessBuilder("cmnd.exe", "arg1 arg2 arg3");
> pb.start();
>
> And for simplicity first try these with a program that is the equivalent
> of:
>
> public class Tester
> {
> public static main(String args)
> {
> for (int i = 0; i < args.length; i++)
> System.out.println(args[i]);
> }
> }
>
> but written is written in the same language as the program(s) you want to
> run with ProcessBuilder. What results did you see?
>
>
Great advice, you and Chris Uppal both. Every time I've had to run an
external program from Java (well, from anything) as an executable, it's
usually an OS-specific and app-specific thing. In each case I more or
less end up doing what you guys suggest: experimentation.
On one long-running set of related projects that's lasted over a year
now, this process of experimentation was even more extensive. The
problem involved accessing PostgreSQL data on a RHEL Linux box that
required SSH, with password. The access was/is from an ESB, Java-based.
To date I've found that tunneling and port forwarding works in some
situations, with the ssh command and Expect, in other cases it was
easier to use 'ssh' and 'empty' and to execute scripts on both the
client and DB server. These were all ProcessBuilder situations.
But in one situation the experiments made it clear that JSch was the
most reliable, dispensing with ProcessBuilder entirely.
In all of these cases I was able to discern what arguments were being
received by various targets, and that's what matters. That's what you
work with.
AHS
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-04-16 15:48 -0700
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-04-16 16:48 -0700
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-20 13:00 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-04-20 15:13 +0200
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-20 19:07 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-04-20 09:24 -0700
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-20 19:34 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-04-20 11:01 -0700
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-21 00:25 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-04-20 22:03 +0200
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-21 00:29 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-04-20 21:56 +0000
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-21 08:31 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-04-21 11:08 +0000
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-04-21 13:43 -0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-21 23:12 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-04-21 21:17 +0000
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-27 22:49 -0400
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-04-20 15:03 -0700
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-21 08:26 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-04-21 14:30 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Knute Johnson <nospam@knutejohnson.com> - 2013-04-21 09:20 -0700
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-04-21 11:31 -0700
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-04-21 16:06 -0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-04-21 19:47 +0000
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-04-21 23:01 +0000
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-21 23:29 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-21 23:45 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-04-21 21:38 +0000
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Knute Johnson <nospam@knutejohnson.com> - 2013-04-21 18:49 -0700
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-22 09:36 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-22 10:39 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-04-22 07:43 -0700
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-22 19:33 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-23 07:30 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-04-22 21:07 +0000
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-23 23:28 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-04-23 21:05 +0000
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-24 11:22 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-04-24 20:22 +0000
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Nigel Wade <nmw@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2013-04-24 11:24 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-21 23:23 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-21 00:40 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-23 10:48 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-04-23 13:31 +0300
<? extends String> (was: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21) Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-23 14:55 +0100
Re: <? extends String> lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-04-23 16:37 +0100
Re: <? extends String> Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-04-23 08:50 -0700
Re: <? extends String> lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-04-23 17:30 +0100
Re: <? extends String> Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-04-23 09:58 -0700
Re: <? extends String> Donkey Hottie <donkey@fredriksson.dy.fi> - 2013-04-23 21:06 +0300
Re: <? extends String> lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-04-23 19:33 +0100
Re: <? extends String> Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-04-23 12:26 -0700
Re: <? extends String> lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-04-24 09:08 +0100
Re: <? extends String> Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-04-23 16:28 -0300
Re: <? extends String> (was: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-04-23 14:12 -0700
Re: <? extends String> Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-23 23:22 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-23 19:56 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-23 23:31 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-23 23:39 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-24 09:29 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-24 10:26 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-24 13:11 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-24 22:24 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-25 11:49 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-25 10:19 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-04-25 09:02 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-25 11:47 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-25 09:50 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-25 10:07 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-04-27 08:44 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-26 20:17 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2013-04-27 09:22 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-27 12:39 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-23 23:17 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-04-23 17:32 -0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-24 10:39 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-04-25 09:02 +0100
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-25 11:59 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-04-25 18:38 -0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-28 10:57 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-27 22:35 -0400
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-04-28 09:23 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-28 09:52 -0400
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2013-04-20 17:52 +0300
Re: exec problem is JDK 1.7.0_21 Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-04-27 22:31 -0400
csiph-web