From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: shell-command - missing shell-quote-argument for program? Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 14:49:33 +0200 Message-ID: <85vemx38yq.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <452517DC.5010007@student.lu.se> <45251C56.8010603@student.lu.se> <4526401C.7060604@student.lu.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1160139143 9106 80.91.229.2 (6 Oct 2006 12:52:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 12:52:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andreas Schwab , Emacs Devel , Lennart Borgman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 06 14:52:21 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GVpBa-0002ee-5t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Oct 2006 14:52:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GVpBZ-0002Tg-Lm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Oct 2006 08:52:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GVp9P-00075F-E2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Oct 2006 08:50:03 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GVp9O-00070W-EA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Oct 2006 08:50:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GVp9N-0006zb-Ut for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Oct 2006 08:50:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GVpGG-0006AG-EH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Oct 2006 08:57:08 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1GVp9M-0003zw-HG; Fri, 06 Oct 2006 08:50:00 -0400 Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id E3BB61C460D5; Fri, 6 Oct 2006 14:49:33 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-Reply-To: (Kim F. Storm's message of "Fri\, 06 Oct 2006 14\:43\:45 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:60460 Archived-At: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > Andreas Schwab writes: > >> Lennart Borgman writes: >> >>> I can not find any uses of explicit-bash-args in the lisp sources. >> >> C-h f shell RET >> >> "[...] >> The shell file name (sans directories) is used to make a symbol name >> such as `explicit-csh-args'. > > I don't know, but I would assume there are more bash than csh users > these days? So maybe that should be changed to explicit-bash-args ? I think it should be changed to the shell name used most often on systems that are predominantly GNU. It may be that "explicit-sh-args" would actually be more often what is used rather than "explicit-bash-args" since I would suspect that using bash under the "sh" name is pretty common. On the other hand, customizing bash-specific options into explicit-sh-args by default does not seem like a good idea, either. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum