Re: Make call-process (and start-process?) filename handlers?

["Ehud Karni" <ehud@unix.mvs.co.il>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 11:21:58 +0100, Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> wrote:
> 
> |> > I'm concerned about shell-command, because it looks like this will
> |> > make all shell commands execute remotely when you are visiting a
> |> > remote file.  That is not natural, and not necessarily correct; it
> |> > could cause a painful surprise.  It might be ok as a special exception
> |> > feature, if it were documented as one.  Currently it isn't.
> |> 
> |> Stefan and me have precisely the opposite opinion: we find it natural
> |> to execute the program on the remote host, and unnatural to do it
> |> locally.
> 
> It depends, I'd say.  If you just want to do a quick shell command, you
> probably want to execute it locally.  But if you run the shell command on
> the file associated with the buffer it is surely natural to run it on the
> same host where the file resides.  IMHO in most cases you want to run it
> locally, and running remotely should be a special case.

I had this problem with my enhancement to compilations (calling
`compile-internal'). I solved it by letting the user use the prefix
argument (\C-u) to specify a remote compilation.

Ehud.


- -- 
 Ehud Karni           Tel: +972-3-7966-561  /"\
 Mivtach - Simon      Fax: +972-3-7966-667  \ /  ASCII Ribbon Campaign
 Insurance agencies   (USA) voice mail and   X   Against   HTML   Mail
 http://www.mvs.co.il  FAX:  1-815-5509341  / \
 mailto:ehud@unix.mvs.co.il                  Better  Safe  Than  Sorry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: use http://www.keyserver.net/ to get my key (and others)

iD8DBQE+IqYBLFvTvpjqOY0RAvqRAJ9kBEfpdRwbtpWtRzlP7VldCGy4NwCeI9/u
hHoquRhjVQZL25SBAO5Y+zE=
=Hn61
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----