[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Mc Digest, Vol 43, Issue 9

Subject: Re: Mc Digest, Vol 43, Issue 9
From: wwp
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 23:57:27 +0100
Hello Pavel,


On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 00:47:25 +0200 Pavel Tsekov <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello chris,
> 
> Friday, November 23, 2007, 6:54:44 AM, you wrote:
> 
> > previous posters wrote:
> |>>> Do you refer to the notorious "The shell is already running a
> > command" issue ?
> 
> |>> Yes, this one exactly.
> 
> > |Ok. Yes - it is really hard to fix. You've been around for many years
> > |now so I'd expect you to know more about this issue. Anyway...
> > .... snip ..
> > | It really is not
> > |that simple to fix it. And it really isn't and error.
> > ==================
> > It's not an error, but it's very annoying.
> > I.e. it doesn't have a technical solution, but it does
> > have a 'socio-managment' solution: just make it known up-front
> > and suggest a work around.
> 
> > The problem which is as annoying as "getting a mesg to first
> > complete some other task, when you want to apply breaks on
> > your vehicle", and should not be trivialised.
> 
> > Only after much frustration did I find a work-around:
> > * Ctrl O to get 'behind the current ?shell?',
> > * Ctrl C to stop/attend to the 'problematic proccess',
> > * ls : just to select some task to confirm that some thing
> >     can be done,
> > * Ctrl O to get back to select what was intended to be done.
> 
> > It happens to me often after I've gone on-line [dialup] and
> > a system generated mesg has come to my mail: I can't execute
> > my intended inet-fetch-script until I acknowledge the damned
> > mail-mesg by the steps above.
> 
> > Many linux users hate mc. Perhaps this quirk is the reason ?
> 
> Do you have any evidence which points towards that ?
> 
> > If a work-around is made known up-front, this avoids
> > frustration ?
> 
> A workaround such as what ? A possible workaround depends
> very much on why the messages is displayed. You could
> have started an interactive program in the shell and
> forgotton about it, next you type a command in the
> prompt widget and the error box is displayed ... what should
> you do about that ? There are different scenarios which
> my trigger the error message.

The itchy thing that was my concern, is then the "error" message is
raised whenever it should NOT be (nothing is running in background -
BTW it's not mandatorily ctrl+c that I have to press when back to
subshell, it works w/ [enter]). Someone said in the thread that it's
not an error message.. I'm OK w/ that assertion, but getting this
message under certain conditions, *is* erroneous, it's a false positive.


Regards,

-- 
wwp
_______________________________________________
Mc mailing list
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>