[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Relation between the value of shell-file-name and explicit-shell-fi

From: Stuart D. Herring
Subject: Re: Relation between the value of shell-file-name and explicit-shell-file-name
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:33:15 -0800 (PST)
User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.8-2.el3.7lanl

> What is the relation between the values of these two variables? Could
> the doc strings please mention something about it? (Does
> explicit-shell-file-name override shell-file-name for explicitly
> requested shells? Are those the shells started with M-x shell? )

`explicit-shell-file-name' is only ever used by M-x shell.  It does

(or explicit-shell-file-name
    (getenv "ESHELL") shell-file-name)

which obviously prefers $ESHELL to `shell-file-name' and
`explicit-shell-file-name' to $ESHELL.  Note that it was different in
Emacs 21:

(or explicit-shell-file-name
    (getenv "ESHELL")
    (getenv "SHELL")

Here `shell-file-name' is absent.  The idea is that e-s-f-n is the
"personal" shell and s-f-n is the "utility" shell used by such things as
M-! and (unless you customize `ediff-shell') M-x ediff.

What do you want added to e-s-f-n's doc string to clarify this?


This product is sold by volume, not by mass.  If it appears too dense or
too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]