[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Generalize start-process with keyword args

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Generalize start-process with keyword args
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 09:15:35 +0200

> From: Andy Moreton <address@hidden>
> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 22:27:44 +0000
> On Mon 16 Mar 2015, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >> From: Andy Moreton <address@hidden>
> >> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 19:12:45 +0000
> >> 
> >> start-process assumes that the system is capable of handling shebang
> >> lines in shell scripts and launching them by executing a shell.
> >
> > Can you point out where does this assumption live in the code?
> In the callers of start-process

Can you give me an example of such a caller?  (I'm not asking idle
questions here; there are aspects of the problem you describe that
aren't really clear to me, but I prefer finding out the answers by
looking at the code than by asking too many questions.)

> which assume that an executeable shell script can be used as the
> command argument.

How do they decide that a shell script is executable?

> >> It would be useful to have a way to have start-process have an option to
> >> start the new process via a shell, so that existing code that assumes
> >> that it can use start-process with an executable shell script can also
> >> be made to work on Windows.
> >
> > The Windows shells cannot run Unix shell script, so I'm not sure I
> > understand how would you like this to work.
> By (optionally) invoking the command via a shell.

But what shell would be able to interpret such scripts on Windows?
AFAIK, there are no good candidates for that role.

> This allows integration of unix style commands inplemented as
> executable shell scripts with Win32 emacs.

IMO, those shell scripts should be ported to Windows by converting
them to batch files that the stock Windows shell can interpret.

reply via email to

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