salzman@randvax.UUCP (Isaac Salzman) (03/13/89)
Hello netland! Does anyone really use Emacs as a login shell? Do you have
any particularly interesting applications of Emacs? We all know that Emacs
is more than just an editor. Many people read their e-mail, netnews and do
all sorts of other things in Emacs. Do you do anything unique and different
with Emacs? Is so, please reply to this message via direct e-mail to the
address below. Thanks!!
--
* Isaac J. Salzman ----
* The RAND Corporation - Information Sciences Dept. /o o/ /
* 1700 Main St., PO Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90406-2138 | v | |
* AT&T: +1 213-393-0411 x6421 or x7923 (ISL lab) _| |_/
* ARPA: salzman@RAND.ORG or salzman@rand-unix.ARPA / | |
* UUCP: ...!{cbosgd,decvax,sdcrdcf}!randvax!salzman | | | sethr@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu (Seth Robertson) (03/14/89)
In article <1908@randvax.UUCP> salzman@rand.org (Isaac Salzman) writes: >Hello netland! Does anyone really use Emacs as a login shell? >* Isaac J. Salzman ---- If it wern't for ksh, I might actually do that IF emacs had job control!! When you can't suspend or background or even cancel(!) a job, the shell mode isn't really usuable. Of course if I just havn't RTFM (I have, though) and there is a way to use job control, then please tell me. -Seth seth@ctr.columbia.edu
barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin) (03/15/89)
In article <1296@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu> seth@ctr.columbia.edu (Seth Robertson) writes: >If it wern't for ksh, I might actually do that IF emacs had job >control!! When you can't suspend or background or even cancel(!) a >job, the shell mode isn't really usuable. All the special shell-mode commands are listed by C-h m (the command to describe the current major mode) while in shell mode. C-c C-c kills the current job, C-c C-z suspends it, etc. The standard definitions of these have trouble when the jobs are setuid, though, since they work by actually sending a signal. I've got modified versions that simply shove a C-c or C-z through the pty. Barry Margolin Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
mac@mrk.ardent.com (Michael McNamara) (03/15/89)
In article <1296@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu> seth@ctr.columbia.edu (Seth Robertson) writes: |In article <1908@randvax.UUCP> salzman@rand.org (Isaac Salzman) writes: |>Hello netland! Does anyone really use Emacs as a login shell? |>* Isaac J. Salzman ---- | |If it wern't for ksh, I might actually do that IF emacs had job |control!! When you can't suspend or background or even cancel(!) a |job, the shell mode isn't really usuable. | |Of course if I just havn't RTFM (I have, though) and there is a way to |use job control, then please tell me. +---------You asked: All the job control of the underlying shell is available; if that shell is ksh or csh, then C-z, bg & fg all work ( albeit you'll have to quote the C-z via C-q C-z, or use the Shell mode mapping of "C-c C-z stop-shell-subjob". {from help on shell-mode} ) Interrupt works for every shell I know of: either C-q C-c or "C-c C-c interrupt-shell-subjob" {from help on shell-mode} This info, and helpful hints about any mode you are in is available via C-h m. C-h m should perhaps be used before you RTFM, as it is a much more immediate and directed a form of help; it tells you *NOW* about the mode you are in *NOW*. R'ingTFM losses due to having to find the FM, and having to find the pertinate information in the FM. [ Note: C-h m means hit control H then m. ] Note also that there are further ksh'isms available for shell.el that make things like C-c C-p scroll through your shell history just like j or C-p do in ksh(1). If you want this, ask here and someone will post this. +--------------------------------- | | | -Seth | seth@ctr.columbia.edu +--------------------------------- Michael McNamara mac@ardent.com
sbb@esquire.UUCP (Stephen B. Baumgarten) (03/15/89)
In article <4599@ardent.UUCP> mac@mrk.ardent.com (Michael McNamara) writes: > Note also that there are further ksh'isms available for >shell.el that make things like C-c C-p scroll through your shell >history just like j or C-p do in ksh(1). If you want this, ask here >and someone will post this. > >Michael McNamara > mac@ardent.com This sounds very nice. If it's short enough, I'd appreciate a posting. - Steve Baumgarten cmcl2!esquire!sbb esquire!sbb@cmcl2.nyu.edu
mac@mrk.ardent.com (Michael McNamara) (03/16/89)
In article <1078@esquire.UUCP> sbb@esquire.UUCP (Stephen B. Baumgarten) writes: |In article <4599@ardent.UUCP> mac@mrk.ardent.com (Michael McNamara) writes: |> Note also that there are further ksh'isms available for |>shell.el that make things like C-c C-p scroll through your shell |>history just like j or C-p do in ksh(1). If you want this, ask here |>and someone will post this. |> |>Michael McNamara |> mac@ardent.com | |This sounds very nice. If it's short enough, I'd appreciate a posting. | |- Steve Baumgarten | cmcl2!esquire!sbb | esquire!sbb@cmcl2.nyu.edu I thought you would ask for the diffs... M-x excuse-mode I recently changed jobs, and those mods didn't make it out of the ashes of my failed ex-company... I'm sure they're on a tape somewhere, but I'd have to pry them loose from some rather cranky creditors of the old company. Of course, we do have that wonderful content addressable medium, the Usenet... Do any of you have the ksh style enhancement to shell.el? Dave Sill? which one of the various shell.el enhancements adds [kt]sh style command line history editing to shell.el? (Steve; if someone sends you this, send me a copy also...) _________________ Michael McNamara mac@ardent.com
Ram-Ashwin@cs.yale.edu (Ashwin Ram) (03/16/89)
In article <1296@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu>, sethr@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu (Seth Robertson) writes: > In article <1908@randvax.UUCP> salzman@rand.org (Isaac Salzman) writes: > >Hello netland! Does anyone really use Emacs as a login shell? > > If it wern't for ksh, I might actually do that IF emacs had job > control!! When you can't suspend or background or even cancel(!) a > job, the shell mode isn't really usuable. > > Of course if I just havn't RTFM (I have, though) and there is a way to > use job control, then please tell me. GNU Emacs does allow job control in a shell, but I'm curious why this is needed at all. Job control, as far as I can see, is a hangover from the days of one-window terminals. Since Emacs gives you multiple windows, it's just as easy, and far more natural, to use different windows for different jobs you want running at the same time. These jobs can be run as processes in individual windows, or you can just start up a new shell and run each job in its own shell with its own window. I've never felt the need to do complicated job management within a single shell window. -- Ashwin.
warsaw@cme.nbs.gov (Barry A. Warsaw) (03/18/89)
In article <1078@esquire.UUCP> sbb@esquire.UUCP (Stephen B. Baumgarten) writes: > In article <4599@ardent.UUCP> mac@mrk.ardent.com (Michael McNamara) writes: >> Note also that there are further ksh'isms available for >>shell.el that make things like C-c C-p scroll through your shell >>history just like j or C-p do in ksh(1). If you want this, ask here >>and someone will post this. >>Michael McNamara >> mac@ardent.com > This sounds very nice. If it's short enough, I'd appreciate a posting. > - Steve Baumgarten Yes, please post! I've been wanting a function to scroll through the history in shell-mode but haven't been able to get around to hacking on this (also hoping someone's already done it). -B
gnulists@WHEATIES.AI.MIT.EDU (03/28/89)
In article <430@arnold.UUCP> dave@arnold.UUCP (Dave Arnold) writes: >What is the difference between using pty's and using pipes for emacs >subprocesses? There are some programs that care whether they are being used interactively or as part of a pipeline, using isatty() to check whether the output is going to a terminal. Shell mode uses a pty so that they will know that they are being used interactively. Barry Margolin Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
gnulists@WHEATIES.AI.MIT.EDU (03/28/89)
In article <37506@think.UUCP>, barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin) writes: > In article <1296@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu> seth@ctr.columbia.edu (Seth Robertson) writes: > versions that simply shove a C-c or C-z through the pty. > What is the difference between using pty's and using pipes for emacs subprocesses? -- Dave Arnold ...!uunet!ccicpg!arnold!dave Volt Delta Resources dave@arnold.volt.com (714) 921-7635
rbj@dsys.icst.nbs.GOV (Root Boy Jim) (04/13/89)
? From: Ashwin Ram <Ram-Ashwin@yale.arpa> ? GNU Emacs does allow job control in a shell, but I'm curious why this is ? needed at all. Job control, as far as I can see, is a hangover from the days ? of one-window terminals. Since Emacs gives you multiple windows, it's just ? as easy, and far more natural, to use different windows for different jobs ? you want running at the same time. These jobs can be run as processes in ? individual windows, or you can just start up a new shell and run each job in ? its own shell with its own window. I've never felt the need to do ? complicated job management within a single shell window. ? -- Ashwin. As someone (Elz?) has already explained, job control is a useful feature even in the presence of multiple windows. Consider a tar extract that is running close to using all the available file space. You suspend it, remove some files to free up space, and then resume it. I often run multiple jobs that spit output to the shell, suspending each one while starting up the next, then background them all. Root Boy Jim is what I am Are you what you are or what?