I also default my shell to bash. I might look into wezterm to see if I can get it working with that one. Thanks for the tip about buffer local

On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 7:00 AM Ship Mints <shipmints@gmail.com> wrote:
Check that your default shell supports the function. I understand later macOS defaults to zsh which I have no experience with. I use macOS but I default my shell to bash. If you have an alternate terminal like Wezterm you could verify your shell settings there https://wezfurlong.org/wezterm/shell-integration.html#osc-7-escape-sequence-to-set-the-working-directory

As far as your osc filter goes, I think it would be better to install it buffer-locally in a shell-mode-hook so you don't interfere with other comint uses.

  (defun my/shell-mode-hook ()
    (shell-dirtrack-mode -1)
    (add-hook 'comint-output-filter-functions #'comint-osc-process-output nil 'local))
  (add-hook 'shell-mode-hook #'my/shell-mode-hook)

On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 3:16 AM Colton Goates <coltongoates@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't know how dirtrack would tell the difference between a prompt output and other printed output. I just thought of the edge case and decided to point it out in case someone knew of a solution. Thanks for responding.

On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 11:55 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> From: Colton Goates <coltongoates@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 10:27:00 -0700
> Cc: 74524@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> Coltons-MacBook-Pro:/Users/coltongoates/software-dev/$ isn't intended to be a directory name, it's a string
> that's intended to look exactly like my prompt. (I know it's pretty contrived.)
>
> So, if someone prints something that resembles their prompt, dirtrack will change the directory, because
> dirtrack thinks it just saw the shell prompt appear, but it really just saw a string that resembles the prompt.
> Does that make more sense now?

What do you expect dirtrack to do when you deliberately try to deceive
it?  AFAIU, dirtrack is a piece of heuristic ad-hocery (as explained
in its commentary), so it cannot be expected to survive such
deception.  What kind of changes would you suggest to consider to
handle the cases such as this one?