Re: Major usability issue

[Barry Margolin <barmar@genuity.net>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1538 bytes --]

In article <mailman.1031086444.5149.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>,
Bruce Korb  <bkorb@pacbell.net> wrote:
>Kai Großjohann wrote:
>
>> > For years I have captured the output of a shell command and inserted
>> > it into my document.  The latest distributions of Linux now carry a
>> > version of emacs that makes doing that non-obvious.
>
>> See the document on shell-command-on-region to see how to change it:
>
>This is a behavioral change not listed in the news.

What change?

>
>> /----
>> | If the command generates output, the output may be displayed
>> | in the echo area or in a buffer.
>> | If the output is short enough to display in the echo area
>> | (determined by the variable `max-mini-window-height' if
>> | `resize-mini-windows' is non-nil), it is shown there.  Otherwise
>> | it is displayed in the buffer `*Shell Command Output*'.  The output
>> | is available in that buffer in both cases.
>> \----
>> 
>> Does this help?
>
>It explains where the text got to.  

It's been doing it this way for quite some time.  I still use 20.7 and it
performs this heuristic.

>				     Thanks!  Now I have to
>set up a macro to pull that text into the current buffer.

Giving it a numeric argument tells it to insert the output in the current
buffer.  M-! inserts it at the point, M-| replaces the region with the
result.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@genuity.net
Genuity, Woburn, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.