On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 03:16:36PM +0000, Mikhael Goikhman wrote: > On 09 Nov 2002 16:00:06 -0500, Dan Espen wrote: > > > > Don't forget FvwmCommand. > > Yes, it should not be forgotten. > > I think it should be replaced with a new command line utility fvwm-exec. > I would like to find a way to do it without FvwmCommandS similarly to how > fvwm-root tells fvwm it changed a root image. I may check whether it is > possible to communicate using X dirrectly and, if yes, will do it later.
Scripting by using roundtrips to the X server? I don't think that is a good idea. On one hand it is far slower than even the current module interface. And on the other hand it creates a lot of problems with permissions and opens even more security holes. > fvwm-commands is a good name too since it will read multiple commands > either from a file (-f file) or stdin (unless -c "cmd" option is given). > Which name do you prefer: fvwm-commands, fvwm-command, fvwm-cmd, > fvwm-send, fvwm-exec? I prefer fvwm-exec or fvwm-commands. > > Later we may add an fvwm command RemoteCommands on|off|restricted. > The default may be "restricted" that disables Exec, PipeRead and modules > with "/" in the path. But on the other hand it may be confusing that Read > is allowed and PipeRead is not, so other default would be ok for me too. > > If the default is "on" then, in addition to removing FvwmCommand/, > FvwmConsole may be removed as well (it is just "xterm -name FvwmConsole > -e fvwm-exec"). Bye Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
