Re: redirect stdout and stderr to PHP variables? [message #176826 is a reply to message #176823] |
Fri, 27 January 2012 11:25 |
M. Strobel
Messages: 386 Registered: December 2011
Karma:
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Am 27.01.2012 11:22, schrieb crankypuss:
> On 01/25/2012 03:52 PM, Peter H. Coffin wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:47:11 -0700, crankypuss wrote:
>>> I'm sure there's a way to do this, probably some simple syntax I've not
>>> run into and am too stupid to find in the manual or through google-fu or
>>> otherwise.
>>>
>>> I'd like to issue an arbitrary shell command in a subroutine and have it
>>> return an array that contains one element representing stdout and
>>> another element representing stderr.
>>>
>>> For example, using tar to deal with a bazillion files, error messages
>>> might not be seen when specifying verbose output; I'd like to collect
>>> them and display after stdout.
>>>
>>> I've not found any syntax, yet, for redirecting to a PHP variable rather
>>> than some file.
>>
>> Sorry, you have to use the file, then read the file if you want to parse
>> back in what went out on stderr.
>
> Actually no, I do not have to use no steenking files, I might have to start writing
> something from scratch in freaking assembler, but I don't have to use no steenking
> files to do something that hasn't the least thing to do with files.
>
> Thank you though, and apologies for any crankiness that has leaked into my post...
> I'm going through the transition from many years of Windows to using Linux, and
> although I mostly like it, I find the tendency for scripts to rely on command output
> run through pipes to be abhorrent since the whole concept of validity checking goes
> out the window when you swallow that paradigm, and writing a file when it isn't
Can you expand on that? There must be a misunderstanding, the command you run does
all validity checking, me thinks.
/Str.
> necessary to the actual process but rather is a matter of conformance to sloppiness
> in the environment is at least as bad imo.
|
|
|