On 15-Mar-2001, Daniel Pittman wrote:
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Edward J. Sabol wrote:
I agree with Francesco. I don't like "/!/" at all.
The prefix will be changeable, using custom, with no trouble at all.
Yes, that's always been the case, but I strongly feel that the default should
I was afraid that this which-like command might be known by
various names on various systems, and the output might vary.
I tried this, and I think it should work on any bourne shell:
echo $PATH |
tr : \\n |
while read dir;
do if [ -x $dir/perl ];
then echo $dir/perl; break;
fi; done
Wasn't there a system where it was better to use the built-in test
rather than the binary?
Yes. Practically every system in existence, I believe.
Maybe it is really best to search for a decent shell, first.
Perhaps.
Here's a clue: If you have /bin/ksh (which is pretty much a given on every
Right now, Tramp uses `echo foo*' to find completions for foo. If we
want completions to be case-insensitive, we have the following
options:
(1) Always retrieve the whole directory contents.
This might be slow in large directories.
(2) Say `echo [fF][oO][oO]*' instead.
[...]
Thoughts?
I wrote:
However, it still doesn't work on Digital Unix 4.0. :-(
Kai wrote:
How would I find that out? I did a quick test and it appears that maybe
the following mechanism works:
test / -nt / 2/dev/null ; echo $?
The above prints 1 if `-nt' is known, and a different number otherwise.
rcp.el Log Message: Michael Sternberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
send `mesg n'
I wonder if we might want to send "biff n" as well. Anyone?
Excerpts from mail: (13-Dec-99) Re: VC/RCS: Checking in files remotely change
comments. by Pete Forman
A more robust method is to use tr to generate control characters, e.g.
% echo 'a^b' | tr '^' '\012'
a
b
Yep, that works. Another possibility is to use printf instead. That will work
Grossjohann
"Edward J. Sabol" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On an unrelated topic, does anyone here use complete.el (which comes with
Emacs 19.3x and higher, I think) to be able to `find-file' on file names
like "*.[ch]"? I do this *all* the time, so I implemented a replacement
for `
Excerpts from mail: (14-May-99) Re: help request: remote rcs broke by Kai Grossjohann
What's wrong with the advice? I don't get it :-(
If it's any consolation, I found the same problem when I was writing what
became `rcp-handle-expand-many-files.' Initially, I tried to advise
Excerpts from mail: (09-Mar-99) rcp.el: operate without rcp/scp/rsync? by Kai
Grossjohann
Stefan says that rcp.el should be able to do without rcp or scp or
rsync. What should we do, though?
I still don't like that idea much. I prefer using rcp/scp for file transport.
I think the alternative
10 matches
Mail list logo
