On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 1:25 PM David Karr <davidmichaelk...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 5:06 AM Michael Albinus <michael.albi...@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>
>> David Karr <davidmichaelk...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> Hi David,
>>
>> > So, it seems like there's something about my process of creating shell
>> > buffers, which if done before the first tramp connection, makes tramp
>> > time out. I don't know what information tramp caches. It's possible
>> > that in the last scenario, if I then tried a tramp connection to a
>> > different host, that would fail, but I'm just guessing.
>>
>> OK, that seems to be it.
>>
>> > I create shell buffers using a couple of very small packages that I
>> > wrote decades ago, which I haven't had any issues with since. They
>> > manage a "ring" of shell buffers which I can either step through, or
>> > search for a particular one by its current directory. I'll attach
>> > them, if there's a clue there. Reading the file comment for
>> > "cycle-shell.el", I think I must have simplified it slightly after I
>> > wrote that comment, because I don't depend on a "shell-for-cycle"
>> > package anymore.
>>
>> I've skimmed only shortly over the packages. However, you seem to create
>> shell buffers premature, before calling `shell'. So that function
>> expects, that the shell buffer is already prepared properly. But it
>> isn't I guess, `shell' does something more when creating a new buffer.
>>
>> So I recommend to let `shell' do everything it believes what should be
>> done creating a buffer. You might debug your functions to see where they
>> block. And for your functionality, adding shell buffers to a ring, you
>> could add yourself into `shell-mode-hook', which seems to be the proper
>> place.
>>
>
> I was thinking that I haven't really looked at this code for a very long
> time and might not be able to figure out how to make this happen, but I
> decided to give it a try, and I noticed in the doc for the "shell" function
> that it can take a prefix argument for the name of the buffer to use,
> instead of the default. That might be a better way to do this that might
> make it more compatible with tramp. I'll see if I can figure this out.
>
> Before I noticed this, I had tried sending a request for help on this to
> gnu.emacs.help, but I got crickets.
>
Unfortunately, my first stab at this didn't help. I think the new function
is an improvement, but it didn't fix the problem. Here's the new defun:
---------------------------
(defun cycle-make-shell ()
"Implements a ring of *shell* buffers. If current buffer is not a shell
buffer, then it will just execute 'shell'. If it IS a shell buffer, then
create a new shell buffer, starting with '*shell-1*', but skipping to the
next
number if that already exists."
(interactive)
(let* ((bufname (buffer-name (current-buffer))))
(if (string-match "\*shell\\(\*\\|-\\([0-9][0-9]*\\)\*\\)" bufname)
(progn
(setq change-dir default-directory)
(setq done nil)
(while (not done)
(progn
(setq new-bufname (next-bufname bufname "shell"))
(if (bufferp (get-buffer new-bufname))
(setq bufname new-bufname)
(setq done t)
)
)
)
(shell new-bufname)
)
(progn
;; check for existence of buffer last-shell-buffer. If it exists,
;; go to it. If not, then execute "shell".
(if (and (bufferp last-shell-buffer)
(not (killed-buffer-p last-shell-buffer)))
(switch-to-buffer last-shell-buffer)
(shell))
)
)
)
)
----------------------
>
>
>> Sorry that I cannot say too much about. Starting by tomorrow, I'll be
>> almost offline for some days.
>>
>> Best regards, Michael.
>>
>
