On Oct 28, 2008, at 11:03 , mabshoff wrote: > On Oct 28, 10:58 am, "Justin C. Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Oct 28, 2008, at 10:41 , Tim Abbott wrote: >> >>> On Oct 28, 1:07 pm, "Justin C. Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> For example "tar tf foo.spkg" works just fine on Mac OS X (10.5); >>>> and >>>> as Robert noted, you can teach the Finder with the Get-Info trick. >> >>> The issue with tar is not on whether tar -xf foo.spkg works, but >>> whether tar -xf sage_scripts<tab> will complete the remainder of the >>> filename. >> >> I think I'm missing something. Does 'bash' know about commands and >> their "file types"? If I type >> tar -xf foo[TAB] >> and there's a "foo.spkg" in my working directory, I get the >> completion, unless there are several files with names beginning with >> "foo" (and then a second [TAB] gives me that list). Does 'bash' do >> something special in that case? Or am I missing your point? > > You can use the complete command to associate binaries with certain > extensions, i.e. > > complete -f -X '!*.@(dvi|DVI)?(.@(gz|Z|bz2))' xdvi > > from /etc/bash_completion
Well, well, well...I have to read man pages... Thanks. That's enough new things learned for one day! > But in the end I agree with you on the "-1" on the proposed name > change. It is much less work to add instructions to the manual on how > to add association/completion for popular tools than changing the name > of the spkg extenion. Me too :-} Justin -- Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon at Large Director Institute for the Enhancement of the Director's income ----------- -- They said it couldn't be done, but sometimes, it doesn't work out that way. - Casey Stengel -- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
