Re: Mc Digest, Vol 23, Issue 6

[Reynir Stefansson <reynirhs isl is>]

Pavel Tsekov wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 23:08 +0000, Reynir Stefansson wrote:
>   
> > What does MC need from a shell for subshell support to work, at least in 
> > theory?
> >     
>
> The ability to notify mc that it has finished executing a command.
>   

I'll assume it's a signal and refer to it here as SIGBURP. And since MC 
can not be hacked to raise an alert box on return from shell-out before 
a SIGBURP (or let you know some other way), I'll have to either live 
with occasionally wanting to Dragu Slave the directory-hold function or 
patch the shell to fire SIGBURP whenever the command line empties.

> > I recall a case (see MC Digest v7n3 for *that* little episode) 
> > where MC wouldn't go subshell with /bin/sh. At that time /bin/sh was a 
> > link to /bin/bash. It's of course possible that bash masqueraded as sh 
> > when run as /bin/sh. I didn't look into it then. I just wanted to 
> > un-fubar the subshell.
> >
> > Thought: Does the subshell *have* to be the same as the login shell? Or 
> > am I being stupid again? Both? Banner news, that.
> >     
>
> No, the subshell can be different, but you would need to "fool" mc
> because it tries to use the login shell and it checks shells by name,
> not by actual functionality.
>   

That appears to be the only easy way to do it. A config option ('login' 
(stays with login shell), 'auto' (if the login shell is unsuitable; 
looks for a known suitable shell) or '/path-to/shell' (for a specific 
shell)) might help - and not just shell developers.

Stray thot: Could one build a harness that goes through /etc/shells and 
tests each shell to see if it fires SIGBURP? Do I feel hedgehogged 
enough to do it myveryownself?

Reynir H. Stefánsson (reynirhs isl is)