From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: executable-find in files.el Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 01:19:52 -0400 Message-ID: References: <01c55657$Blat.v2.4$7979dc20@zahav.net.il> <87fywt6128.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <87ekc9lurh.fsf@gmx.de> <87k6lzots5.fsf@gmx.de> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1116425304 18691 80.91.229.2 (18 May 2005 14:08:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:08:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eliz@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 18 16:08:19 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DYPC3-0008An-Tb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 May 2005 16:06:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DYPEV-0006l7-B2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 May 2005 10:09:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DYH0o-00006q-A9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 May 2005 01:22:30 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DYH0j-0008VX-73 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 May 2005 01:22:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DYH0i-0008UA-6e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 May 2005 01:22:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DYH6f-0002yi-95 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 May 2005 01:28:33 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1DYGyG-0003TJ-GX; Wed, 18 May 2005 01:19:52 -0400 Original-To: Michael Albinus In-reply-to: (message from Michael Albinus on Tue, 17 May 2005 18:32:47 +0200) 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:37253 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:37253 One could argue that just calling `process-file' should be sufficient. But it isn't for packages which still want to support Emacs 21. Backwards-compatibility is nice, but it is not the most important thing. > If `call-process' would be able to handle remote > commands, > > I cannot envision any way in which that could make sense. I have no > idea what it would mean for `call-process' to "handle" remote > commands. "handle commands to be executed on a remote host". What call-process does is run a program with given arguments. How would it run this program on a remote host? Perhaps using ssh. But if you want to use ssh, you can do that now. You can invoke ssh to run a command on a remote host. So what really is the new feature that you want? I don't follow the idea. WHat would that mean? How in the world can call-process run the pro