GNU bug report logs - #71049
async-shell-command ends with "Process *Async Shell Command* finished" when remote "direct-async-process"

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry <at> gutov.dev>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: michael.albinus <at> gmx.de, 71049 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#71049: async-shell-command ends with "Process *Async Shell Command* finished" when remote "direct-async-process"
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2024 04:21:46 +0300

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 31/05/2024 21:05, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 19:24:10 +0300
>> Cc:michael.albinus <at> gmx.de,71049 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> From: Dmitry Gutov<dmitry <at> gutov.dev>
>>
>> On 31/05/2024 08:53, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>
>>>> 1) [first patch] We can add a new major mode, for 'M-&' to use instead
>>>> of the full-blown 'shell-mode' - it could be very simple: just apply
>>>> font-lock keywords and maybe set list-buffers-directory.
>>> I think I'm okay with this.  (It needs to be prominently documented,
>>> of course.)
>> In NEWS?
> There, but also in the doc string of M-&, and maybe also in the doc
> string of shell-mode-hook.
> 
>>> But we need a documented way for people to get previous
>>> behavior if they want that.  How would that work?
>> If we really needed the capability to rollback the change, I suppose we
>> could add a defvar pointing to the major mode to use. I.e.
>>
>>     (defvar async-shell-command-major-mode #'shell-command-mode)
> That could work, yes.

How about this?

[shell-command-mode.diff (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Previous Next

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