Re: Setting gdb to use eshell buffer

[Kai Grossjohann <kai@emptydomain.de>]

Kevin Rodgers <ihs_4664@yahoo.com> writes:

> Kai Grossjohann wrote:
>  >
>  > Or one could install a process filter that fishes things from the
>  > *tramp/foo* buffer and copies them into the *compilation* buffer as
>  > they arrive.  But in that case, we need to prohibit users from
>  > invoking Tramp in the meantime, as the *tramp/foo* buffer is already
>  > busy.
>
> Isn't that necessary anyway?  Because otherwise, the current
> implementation would have other Tramp data interspersed with the compile
> command's output in the *tramp/foo* buffer.

Well, my original plan was to allow multiple connections.  Then each
connection could be dedicated to a single compilation, until that
compilation is finished.

If two (remote) processes are writing to the same *tramp/foo* buffer,
it is nearly impossible to tell the chunks apart later.  At least I
haven't found a way to do that.  But if there was a way, multiplexing
a single *tramp/foo* buffer might be the way to go.

But you're right anyway: we need a way to copy the output from the
remote end from the *tramp/foo* buffer to the *compilation* buffer, as
that output arrives, and we need to do that in the background.  This
means that process filters are the easiest way.  And if I want to
reuse the same *tramp/foo* buffer for multiple compilations (which is
a good idea to avoid connection setup overhead), then it won't work to
just name the buffer the *compilation* buffer...

> Would it be feasible for the Tramp compilation function to install the
> process filter and arrange for it to be uninstalled when its done?

Sure.  set-process-filter will be my friend.

Kai