GNU bug report logs - #13649
boobytrapped dired-do-async-shell-command question

Previous Next

Full log

Message #17 received at 13649 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> jurta.org>
Cc: 13649 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, jidanni <at> jidanni.org
Subject: Re: bug#13649: boobytrapped dired-do-async-shell-command question
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 15:44:08 +0200

> From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> jurta.org>
> Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:25:01 +0200
> Cc: 13649 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> > A command is running in the default buffer.  Use a new buffer? (yes or no)
> >
> > Which is a boobytrapped question, as picking "no" will always end up in failure...
> 
> Ah, to you "no" means "don't use a new buffer"?  Yes, this is too ambiguous.
> A better question would be:
> 
>   A command is running in the default buffer.  Run in a new buffer? (yes or no)

Still not clear, IMO (what "default buffer"? run what?).  How about

  Shell output buffer is used by another command; run this command in a new buffer (yes or no)?

> 77 characters long, but I have no idea how to make it shorter
> without much loss of meaning.

I think we should try making it crystal clear and not worry too much
about its length.  The minibuffer is perfectly capable of displaying
multi-line prompts.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.