>>>>I'll semaphorize the processes to resolve conflicts.
>>>>
>>>And why will that be any problem? A small part of VFP will remain in memory for a few more nanoseconds, doing clean up, that's all.
>>
>>It's for an updater, the second process must ensure the calling process is completely off-cpu.
>
>If you want to replace the running program, you try something that's simply not possible. Instead you need what's called a "loader" or a "launcher".
>Check Message#1314363

As I said, Tore, I want to replace not the running program, but the caller program. That's why I need to assure it's not running anymore.