I've already done this as Richard asked me to DTRT. I've also used with-current-buffer where needed, and made the code fit on 80 columns.
Thanks!
The pretest has not started yet and it makes sense to fix all reported bugs anyway.
I did not say I had anything against it.
I don't use Tumme so it would be good if you can test my changes.
I will.
> I am a bit skeptical about > the "-c" switch. What problem can you see? If you see a better fix then you should install it.
The problem with it is that it might now work in all shells. For example, on Windows, cmd.exe (the default "shell") uses /c, not -c. I don't know how other shells handle this.
AFAIK shell-command is is for interactive use: hence the message in minibuffer.
I see now that it is an interactive function, but it accepts optional extra parameters which suggests that one can use it non-interactively too, right? Sorry if I misunderstand the purpose and intent of interactive functions. By the way, I checked the source and found this, which proves my point: (call-process shell-file-name nil t nil shell-command-switch command) Please use the same technique, using `shell-command-switch'. /Mathias _______________________________________________ emacs-pretest-bug mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
