Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Cc: 71554@debbugs.gnu.org >> From: Thierry Volpiatto >> Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 18:53:07 +0000 >> >> Christopher Howard writes: >> >> > Hello, I run a lot of async commands a lot with eshell-command, >> > preferring it over shell-command. However, there is a difference >> > between shell-command and eshell-command behavior which is a little >> > bothersome and does not make sense to me. If I run an async command >> > with shell-command, e.g. `sleep 60 &', and then run another one while >> > the first one is still running, shell-command will ask me if I want to >> > create a new buffer for the output, and I usually do. However, if I do >> > the same thing with eshell-command, eshell command will give me only >> > two options, either (1) kill the currently running command, or (2) >> > don't create an output buffer, which also throws an error. I was >> > wondering if it would be possible to add the "create a new buffer" >> > option to eshell-command as well, for the upcoming 30 release. >> >> Please do not add a "ask to create a new buffer" option to fix this >> issue, just do not ask and create a new buffer > > What if the user is not aware that a command is already running? The user can easily see there is already a buffer with a process running. Eshell doesn't kill its async buffers. > More generally, why being consistent with what shell-command does is > not a good idea? Because IMO what shell-command is doing is annoying, no need to duplicate this annoyance, after all when running such a command in a terminal already running a detached process, nothing is asked, so why doing this in emacs? Or at least make it optional? -- Thierry