Prev: Progress with MFC9.0 toolbars
Next: Background image becomes dark after adding watermark, need help.
From: hamishd on 3 May 2008 14:16
Sorry for cross-posting; I'm not sure which group would be more
appropriate, if any.

At present I have 2 applications (installed on the same workstation):
(A) is the main application which is running most, if not all, of
the time. Only one instance of (A) can be running at once.
(B) is an application which send messages to (A). These messages
instruct (A) on what data files to process. This is achieved by
calling (A) with ShellExecute(), passing arguments specifying the
location of a data file (this data file could be any file over the
network of workstations). When (A) receives these arguments, it adds
the data file to it's list of jobs to process.

The above process has been working well. Data can be accessed and
processed anywhere on the network. The downside is the operators can
only "send" data from one workstation.

What I now want to do is install (B) onto all workstations in the
network. Does ShellExecute() work over a network? If not, how to get
around this? What other methods can I use to notify (A) of jobs to
process?

Thanks.

From: Joseph M. Newcomer on 3 May 2008 18:09
Basically, id doesn't work and can't be made to work readily. You would have to be logged
in on the client computer, and be running a program that could accept information about
what files to process, so it could launch B. This is generally considered an "open door"
for security violations, so it would have to be using secured connections (SSL, VPN,
etc.). Many users and most corporations would not allow programs like this to exist on
their machines.
joe


On Sat, 3 May 2008 11:16:56 -0700 (PDT), hamishd <Hamish.Dean(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>Sorry for cross-posting; I'm not sure which group would be more
>appropriate, if any.
>
>At present I have 2 applications (installed on the same workstation):
> (A) is the main application which is running most, if not all, of
>the time. Only one instance of (A) can be running at once.
> (B) is an application which send messages to (A). These messages
>instruct (A) on what data files to process. This is achieved by
>calling (A) with ShellExecute(), passing arguments specifying the
>location of a data file (this data file could be any file over the
>network of workstations). When (A) receives these arguments, it adds
>the data file to it's list of jobs to process.
>
>The above process has been working well. Data can be accessed and
>processed anywhere on the network. The downside is the operators can
>only "send" data from one workstation.
>
>What I now want to do is install (B) onto all workstations in the
>network. Does ShellExecute() work over a network? If not, how to get
>around this? What other methods can I use to notify (A) of jobs to
>process?
>
>Thanks.
Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP]
email: newcomer(a)flounder.com
Web: http://www.flounder.com
MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm
From: Andy Champ on 3 May 2008 18:13
hamishd wrote:
> Sorry for cross-posting; I'm not sure which group would be more
> appropriate, if any.
>
<snip>

Looking at that, it's definitely OT here (comp.lang.c++) and I'm pretty
sure OT over there (microsoft.public.vc.mfc). However, I'm also pretty
sure someone will be able to point you at the right group. How about

microsoft.win32.public.messaging

or one of the other microsoft.win32.public groups?

You might want to think about dcom or somesuch technology. Not a C++
question at all.

Andy
From: Jerry Coffin on 3 May 2008 18:57
In article <984f8ffd-29db-4128-89d9-06976c2a51b6
@x19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Hamish.Dean(a)gmail.com says...
> Sorry for cross-posting; I'm not sure which group would be more
> appropriate, if any.
>
> At present I have 2 applications (installed on the same workstation):
> (A) is the main application which is running most, if not all, of
> the time. Only one instance of (A) can be running at once.
> (B) is an application which send messages to (A). These messages
> instruct (A) on what data files to process. This is achieved by
> calling (A) with ShellExecute(), passing arguments specifying the
> location of a data file (this data file could be any file over the
> network of workstations). When (A) receives these arguments, it adds
> the data file to it's list of jobs to process.
>
> The above process has been working well. Data can be accessed and
> processed anywhere on the network. The downside is the operators can
> only "send" data from one workstation.
>
> What I now want to do is install (B) onto all workstations in the
> network. Does ShellExecute() work over a network? If not, how to get
> around this? What other methods can I use to notify (A) of jobs to
> process?

None of this is really topical here, but if you ask about
NetScheduleJobAdd somewhere that it's topical (e.g. comp.os.ms-
windows.programmer.win32) you'll probably get some helpful replies.

If you want to do something a bit more portable, you might consider
something like a small UDP-based server that listens to a port of your
choice, and when it receives a packet, it's assumed to be a path to a
file to process, so it adds it to the list of files to process.

--
Later,
Jerry.

The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
From: hamishd on 3 May 2008 19:04
On 3 May, 23:09, Joseph M. Newcomer <newco...(a)flounder.com> wrote:
> Basically, id doesn't work and can't be made to work readily. You would have to be logged
> in on the client computer, and be running a program that could accept information about
> what files to process, so it could launch B. This is generally considered an "open door"
> for security violations, so it would have to be using secured connections (SSL, VPN,
> etc.). Many users and most corporations would not allow programs like this to exist on
> their machines.

I will re-phrase. The client wants me to allow data-sending from other
computers.
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Progress with MFC9.0 toolbars
Next: Background image becomes dark after adding watermark, need help.