Joel Reicher <joel.reic...@gmail.com> writes: Hi Joel,
>> Users change tramp-default-remote-shell. And then, there is a good >> chance to benefit from tramp-sh-extra-args. > > And that's kind of what I'm struggling with. I can see the default > value for extra args caters for both bash and zsh. Let's imagine I > have both; which one would be a "better Tramp buddy" as you say below? Both could be good buddies. When used with care (proper shell arguments coming from tramp-sh-extra-args, sensitive settings in .profile). But Tramp doesn't recommend any of them; it is up to the user to change is she isn't happy with tramp-default-remote-shell. /bin/sh is the minimal consensus we could expect to exist remotely. The major problem for Tramp with a remote shell is to detect the shell prompt. > And even as a third option I think invoking bash as sh enables some > POSIX compatibility and disables some bash-specific features, so > perhaps that's better still? What do you mean with this? > My problem here is that from what I can tell the remote shell is > Tramp's agent, and I don't really know what helps Tramp the most. In > the abstract I'm kind of a bit surprised it doesn't deploy a custom > command loop with simple semantics implemented as an awk script or > something like that. (Dependent on a good awk being available, of > course.) There's tramp-find-shell, which does kind of. Could be improved, of course, it is very rudimentary. And it still requires that Tramp has connected to the remote already with tramp-default-remote-shell. > Thanks and regards, > > - Joel Best regards, Michael.
