Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
The exec shell builtin replaces the current process with a specified command. Normally, when the shell encounters a command, it forks off a child process to actually execute the command. Using the exec builtin, the shell does not fork, and the command exec'ed replaces the shell. When used in a script, therefore, it forces an exit from the script when the exec'ed command terminates. For this reason, if an exec appears in a script, it would probably be the final command, and the last lines of your script would never run.
To work around this limitation, try putting the exec command by itself in another executable script, and call that script instead of using the exec command. When the other script finishes, the exit from that script might return execution to the script that called it.
Just guessing, but it's worth a try.
Last edited by bigrigdriver; 10-29-2004 at 01:45 AM.
Yes it did work.. Kees-jan...
sorry I overlooked the idea that it's calling on bash and not using the exec command....
The script wasn't in my /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin folder....etc...etc... so I used this instead: