On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 12:00:58PM +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
I hope this explanation helps. If you have questions, please, ask.
as i understand it, it is a pure implementation problem and not
something fundamental.
mc gets the shell's sigchld at any time (just as it does with output),
so it
Hi,
Pavel Tsekov wrote:
I also don't remember having major trouble with the subshell
myself but then there are enough records in this mailing list
and in other places which testify that the subshell is causing
a lot of confusion. A lot of efforts were thrown in an attempt
to solve the
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
the second variant would be embedding the real shell prompt into the
panels. this could work by presenting the shell a really tiny pty.
to
Could you elaborate, please ? Do you mean implementing another view
for the panels that will display the
On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 04:58:16PM +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
Shall we keep the prompt in this case ?
i think it would be logical.
But then we shall face the same problems. I mean it is not different
from what we do now. The only difference
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
I am not advertising the removal of the subshell . I just want to remove
the ability to execute commands typed at MC's prompt widget trough the
subshell (if it isn't clear yet).
good. but exactly this integration makes it so valuable for me.
Hi Pavel,
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 16:54 +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
I also don't remember having major trouble with the subshell myself but
then there are enough records in this mailing list and in other places
which testify that the subshell is
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 11:27:27AM +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
without the subshell i can't operate mc while the command is executed, i
Ok. But it can be as simple as Ctrl-O, execute command, Ctrl-O. There is
only an extra Ctrl-O.
yes, and i
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
The shell prompt string itself.
ok. maybe it would make sense to implement an own bash-compatible PS1
interpreter. trying to make sense of almost arbitrary program output
sort of has to fail.
Maybe we can even borrow the code directly from bash
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 08:11:55AM +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
* execution of commands typed at MC's prompt widget trough the
subshell
read my lips: NO WAY IN HELL. ;)
this is one of the few actual selling points of mc over all the other
The prompt widget or the fact that if the
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 08:11:55AM +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
* execution of commands typed at MC's prompt widget trough the
subshell
read my lips: NO WAY IN HELL. ;)
this is one of the few actual selling points of mc over all the other
Hello,
The MC subshell while being a nice feature has been the source of many
problems as well. I've been following this list and the MC development for
a while and I can tell that the problems caused by the subshell are the
hardest to track down and eliminate. Trough the years many fixes were
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 04:29:35PM +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
There are several features which are consistent source of problems:
My opinion is that we should remove both features from the subshell.
* the subshell prompt retrieval - this one is widely known to be
unreliable.
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 04:29:35PM +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
There are several features which are consistent source of problems:
My opinion is that we should remove both features from the subshell.
* the subshell prompt retrieval - this one
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 09:58:08PM +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 04:29:35PM +0300, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
There are several features which are consistent source of problems:
My opinion is that we should remove both features
14 matches
Mail list logo
