Matthieu Moy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Stephen Leake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> The part about porting to Windows without 'sh' not being "hard" is not >> true; 'sh' is required to separate stdout from stderr, since Emacs >> call-process merges them. >> >> Creating a version of DVC that does not require 'sh' requires fixing >> call-process first. That is not only "hard" (call-process is the >> hairiest C code I've ever seen), it is probably impossible, since it >> would break every other use of call-process. We might be able to >> implement a new function call-process-separate-stdout-stderr, but >> there's no way it would become part of standard Emacs. > > Well, I don't know Windows enough, but I'd be really surprised if > there were no way to split stdout and stderr on windows other than > using cygwin/mingw. > > I'm not talking about changing Emacs, just finding a native way to do > what we do with "sh".
Ah. Good point. I'm so used to using "sh" for things, I forgot there is a Windows OS shell language :). How about this: In practice, that is not a problem for Unix users, but requires cygwin or mingw for Windows users. 'sh' is used to separate stdout from stderr; the Emacs function 'call-process' merges them. It may be possible to do this with native Windows tools, if someone wants to investigate. -- -- Stephe _______________________________________________ Dvc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/dvc-dev
