Thus it was written in the epistle of Steve Dirickson,
> If the parent is activating the child with a non-zero 'allow' parameter to
> ACTIVATE, you need to change that last call to pass zero for 'allow' (or
> omit it).

Thanks for sending me that direction.  I had wondered (but never tried it) what
would be the use in calling Activate with a zero (or missing) allow parameter.
If I've understood it correctly, it makes the process active, but it won't
actually start doing anything until the parent process terminates.  I'm needing
the child process to do its cleanup and get out of the way prior to the parent
process ending, so that doesn't happen to solve my needs, but it cleared up
the confusion :-).

Thanks,
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([log in to unmask]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
          ==========================================================
I continued to do arithmetic with my father, passing proudly through
fractions to decimals. I eventually arrived at the point where so many cows
ate so much grass, and tanks filled with water in so many hours.  I found it
quite enthralling.
                                            -- Christie, Agatha
An Autobiography.
          ==========================================================
         Deep thought to be found at http://www.southern.edu/~ashted

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *