bug#32640: 26.1; Make `kill-process' a command

[Phil Sainty]

On 05/09/18 22:23, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Is something wrong with signal-process?

I'd failed to notice that; but yes -- interactively, I don't think
that's as good as the changes I'm suggesting, as it doesn't provide
completion for either the process or the signal (not in 26.1, at any
rate), and it doesn't offer defaults for the argument values either.
As such, unless you know offhand the the correct process name or PID
to type at the prompt, it doesn't help very much?

Despite that command existing, I think it's still useful to make
`kill-process' interactive along the general lines of the code I
wrote; and it seems to me that `signal-process' could be likewise
improved to provide equivalent completion for the process, and to
add completion for the signals.

Presumably they could both use the same function for reading the
process interactively?


-Phil