grocery_stocker said:
I would just like to point out that the man pages for both IPC::Open2
and IPC::Open3 assume that the reader is somewhat proficient with
*nix. Over the course of the years, I've met a lot of perl
programmers that don't have the technical literacy to understand and
then use the IPC::Open* functions. I'm serious.
I don't doubt what you say. Being a Perl programmer doesn't make you a
systems administrator (especially a *nix sys admin), and there are
chances of some people not understanding the suggestion. However, I
feel it is best to offer the suggestions just in case, and that's
basically always the case).
Of course, there's no denying that most people that claim to be Perl
programmers are hardly people you would feel comfortable using the term
"Programmer" to describe anyway, so I am aware that pretty much any
suggestion could equally be best left unsaid or tossed out the window,
but I like to offer everyone the same chances, even if sometimes it
might be in vain.
You may notice when I post on usenet, that I rarely to never go into any
great detail, and that's primarily the reason why (going on about
something too unfamiliar to the OP). Should someone wish to pay me to
code for them that's different, but on usenet, I try to post in a frame
of mind to provide everyone with the same answers, so they can improve
if they are capable and willing.
Also, IPC::Open2 does work on Win32 or am I mistaken? (IPC::Open3 isn't
fully supported on it though), and regardless, if the user read over
the module's documentation, they could get some insight/ideas, even
with the pipe usage it could replace.
Also, I didn't want to assume their platform, but the fact they said the
wanted the output from /sbin/lspci, pretty much sealed the suggestion
in my mind and had me believe they have some type of insight. Further
suggestions, directions and information, even if they don't use it, is
always a good thing. They might be able to benefit from it, but it
could certainly only add confusion.