cntl-c
Michael Koppelman wrote on Jun 05, 2003
Forgive my ignorance, but is there an IRAF-approved way to cancel a process in progress? It's seems if you use the nice, standard ctl-C that the app sort of hangs forever. Thanks! Michael Koppelman
Mike Fitzpatrick wrote on Jun 05, 2003
> Forgive my ignorance, but is there an IRAF-approved way to cancel a > process in progress? It's seems if you use the nice, standard ctl-C > that the app sort of hangs forever. Cntrl-C is the way to do it, however there is presently a known problem with this on Mac OS X 10.2 systems that will be fixed in the next patch. In some V2.11 PC-IRAF release this was occassionally a problem after using epar, but other than that it should work now. What platform is this? What task are you trying to interrupt, i.e. a script or compiled task? -Mike
Edi Bon wrote on Jun 06, 2003
You can use kill from standard UNIX command, after "ps -aux", you can find
a proces that you want to cancel, and then put "kill -9"
followed by the number of the proces seen from 'ps -aux'.
Edi
On Thu, 5 Jun 2003, Michael Koppelman
wrote:
> Forgive my ignorance, but is there an IRAF-approved way to cancel a
> process in progress? It's seems if you use the nice, standard ctl-C
> that the app sort of hangs forever.
>
> Thanks!
> Michael Koppelman
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Edi Bon, MSc, department of astrophysics
#### ###### ########
## ## ## ## ## ##
## ## ## ## ######## Astronomical Observatory
## #### ## ## ## ## ## Volgina 7, 11160 Belgrade 74
## ## ## ## ## ## Yugoslavia
## ## ###### ######## IP: 147.91.240.1
Tel: +381 11 401-320
Fax: +381 11 419-553
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Koppelman wrote on Jul 22, 2003
On Wednesday, June 4, 2003, at 11:13 PM, Michael Koppelman wrote: > Forgive my ignorance, but is there an IRAF-approved way to cancel a > process in progress? It's seems if you use the nice, standard ctl-C > that the app sort of hangs forever. I apologize if I missed the answer for this: is there any answer for this? Also, I have two suggestions: 1. Rename PC-IRAF to UNIX-IRAF or better yet just IRAF. If not now soon most people will be running the "PC" version of IRAF and the term "PC" is not at all good at describing what that package is. 2. This is minor but the 'cl' command IMHO should be the 'iraf' command. Yes, I know, IRAF is a lot of pieces fitting together and can be used in many different ways, but most people who run IRAF run the cl all the time and consider the cl to be the iraf program. The name cl is no longer useful. Cheers, Michael Koppelman
Last post on Jul 22, 2003