Re: How to suppress/avoid *Async Shell Command* buffer?

[Marius Hofert <marius.hofert@math.ethz.ch>]

Andreas Röhler writes:

> Am 18.05.2013 12:05, schrieb Marius Hofert:
>> Hi Andreas,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for helping.
>>
>> The purpose is simply for opening them (asynchronously), viewing the pdf
>
> Hmm, probably don't understand yet, what is the difference WRT RET --dired-find-file-- ?

dired-find-file opens it *in Emacs*. I can't edit it then and it's also
a bit slow.

I would like to open the file with *Okular* from Emacs.

>
>> (continuing to work in Emacs), (maybe add annotations to the pdf and save
>> it).
>>
>
> which would mean edit, not just view the pdf(?)

yes.

Maybe I wasn't clear. You can use "!" in dired mode to execute commands
on the file at point. I use that to call Okular to open the file
(in Okular; standalone). The same happens when I cd in the terminal to
the directory containing the pdf file, then type 'okular foo.pdf &', but
that's more tedious of course (also, it exits Okular if I quit the
terminal -- which does not happen if I start it from dired-mode).

>
>
>
>> I use 'dired-mode' as 'file manager' and often would like to open and view
>> pdfs in Okular. I also have other 'dired-guess-shell-alist-user' settings
>> like opening pngs in eog or mp3s in VLC. But everytime I open a file, I get
>> this annoying *Async Shell Command* buffer (either empty or with debug
>> output) and I have to manually close it via C-x 0 etc. to get rid of it.
>
>
> Please give an example of the shell-command used than.

Due to my settings for dired-guess-shell-alist-user (as posted), I
receive the suggestion 'okular ? &' when hitting '!' with the point on
the pdf file. This executes "okular foo.pdf &" in the background (as far
as I know), where 'foo.pdf' is the pdf file at point. Hitting RET starts
Okular, opens foo.pdf (great), but also opens the *Async Shell Command*
buffer in Emacs (as described; not so great).

Cheers,

Marius

>
>   I
>> know that it might contain useful information sometimes and I wouldn't be
>> against it appearing hidden (in the buffer list). But being distracted by
>> this buffer in dired-mode is really unpleasant. If I only knew more emacs
>> lisp...
>>
>
>
> Let's see how it comes out in this case.
>
> Andreas
>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Marius
>>