From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andreas Schwab Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Make call-process (and start-process?) filename handlers? Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 11:21:58 +0100 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <84isxdpyg5.fsf@lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de> <200301102352.h0ANqoK01404@rum.cs.yale.edu> <84hecebeqm.fsf@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1042453522 11552 80.91.224.249 (13 Jan 2003 10:25:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 10:25:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18Y1mT-00030C-00 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 11:25:21 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18Y1tu-0006Wv-00 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 11:33:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18Y1mV-0001BP-00 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 05:25:23 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18Y1lt-00011x-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 05:24:45 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18Y1kU-0007zl-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 05:23:19 -0500 Original-Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193] helo=Cantor.suse.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18Y1jF-0006YR-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 05:22:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Hermes.suse.de (Hermes.suse.de [213.95.15.136]) by Cantor.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8850A14797; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 11:21:58 +0100 (MET) Original-To: kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de (Kai =?iso-8859-1?q?Gro=DFjohann?=) X-Yow: Don't SANFORIZE me!! In-Reply-To: <84hecebeqm.fsf@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> (kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de's message of "Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:54:25 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.09001 (Oort Gnus v0.10) Emacs/21.3.50 (ia64-suse-linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:10704 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:10704 kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de (Kai Großjohann) writes: |> Richard Stallman writes: |> |> > 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. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."