* one big shell command then one small one and it's like pass the joint, mon
@ 2002-06-20 21:17 Dan Jacobson
2002-06-21 18:26 ` Kevin Rodgers
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Dan Jacobson @ 2002-06-20 21:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
Yet another bug. You do one shell command with lots of output and
*Shell Command Output* appears as a bottom window. A second shell
command with a little output then causes the minibuffer to appear with
the same content as *Shell Command Output* most unprofessionally in a
double vision repeated display.
C-x 1 <escape> ! s e q SPC 1 SPC 1 SPC 8 8 <return> <escape> ! s e q
SPC 1 SPC 1 SPC 4 <return>
If you were schmart you would say "Oh, I've already got *Shell Command
Output* up there, no point in making a big deal about it in the
minibuffer." Of course we are adding complexity, but whos schmart
idea was it to make such a peppy minibuffer in the first place?
--
http://jidanni.org/ Taiwan(04)25854780
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: one big shell command then one small one and it's like pass the joint, mon
2002-06-20 21:17 one big shell command then one small one and it's like pass the joint, mon Dan Jacobson
@ 2002-06-21 18:26 ` Kevin Rodgers
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Kevin Rodgers @ 2002-06-21 18:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Yet another bug. You do one shell command with lots of output and
> *Shell Command Output* appears as a bottom window. A second shell
> command with a little output then causes the minibuffer to appear with
> the same content as *Shell Command Output* most unprofessionally in a
> double vision repeated display.
>
> C-x 1 <escape> ! s e q SPC 1 SPC 1 SPC 8 8 <return> <escape> ! s e q
> SPC 1 SPC 1 SPC 4 <return>
>
> If you were schmart you would say "Oh, I've already got *Shell Command
> Output* up there, no point in making a big deal about it in the
> minibuffer." Of course we are adding complexity, but whos schmart
> idea was it to make such a peppy minibuffer in the first place?
As the shell-command doc string and the ChangeLog entries both say, it is
displayed in the echo area, not the minibuffer:
Thu Sep 21 03:59:28 1989 Richard Stallman (rms@mole.ai.mit.edu)
* simple.el (shell-command-on-region): If output is 1 line,
display it in echo area.
Anyway, here's an untested patch to get the behavior you want:
*** emacs-20.7/lisp/simple.el.orig Tue May 2 06:36:41 2000
--- emacs-20.7/lisp/simple.el Fri Jun 21 12:14:56 2002
***************
*** 1346,1352 ****
"succeed"
"fail")))
(kill-buffer buffer))
! ((= lines 1)
(message "%s"
(save-excursion
(set-buffer buffer)
--- 1346,1352 ----
"succeed"
"fail")))
(kill-buffer buffer))
! ((and (= lines 1) (not (get-buffer-window buffer)))
(message "%s"
(save-excursion
(set-buffer buffer)
--
Kevin Rodgers <kevinr@ihs.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-06-21 18:26 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-06-20 21:17 one big shell command then one small one and it's like pass the joint, mon Dan Jacobson
2002-06-21 18:26 ` Kevin Rodgers
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).