GNU bug report logs - #4719
23.1; M-& to run commands asynchronously (async-shell-command)

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 4719 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 4719 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Daniel Clemente <dcl441-bugs <at> yahoo.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 23.1; M-& to run commands asynchronously (async-shell-command)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:10:19 -0700 (PDT)

I propose to add a new function, async-shell-command, bound to M-&, which in analogous to shell-command (bound to M-!) but executes the command in the background (as if you had written an ampersand at the end of M-!).
Both functions would respectively correspond to keys ! and & in dired, only that ! and & work only in dired but M-! and M-& would be global (work everywhere).

The code is in this message in an old thread:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/111825

There are still some details to decide: how many buffers to open, where to direct STDOUT, whether output should be visible, …

Some modes should be checked since they might be using M-&.

Message #10 received at 4719 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: dcl441-bugs <at> yahoo.com
Cc: 4719 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#4719: 23.1; M-& to run commands asynchronously (async-shell-command)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:01:15 -0400

> I propose to add a new function, async-shell-command, bound to M-&,

We have that already now, don't we?


        Stefan

Message #15 received at 4719 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Daniel Clemente <dcl441-bugs <at> yahoo.com>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: 4719 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#4719: 23.1; M-& to run commands asynchronously (async-shell-command)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:50:28 -0700 (PDT)

 
> We have that already now, don't we?

  Yes. I didn't check 23.2, sorry.
  This bug can be closed.

Message #20 received at 4719 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> jurta.org>
To: dcl441-bugs <at> yahoo.com
Cc: 4719 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Subject: Re: bug#4719: 23.1; M-& to run commands asynchronously (async-shell-command)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 23:41:33 +0300

>> We have that already now, don't we?
>
>   Yes. I didn't check 23.2, sorry.
>   This bug can be closed.

I'm not sure this can be closed, because in your original report you wrote:

  There are still some details to decide: how many buffers to open,
  where to direct STDOUT, whether output should be visible, …

Do you expect this to be implemented under this feature request?

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/

Message #27 received at 4719 <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: Daniel Clemente <dcl441-bugs <at> yahoo.com>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> jurta.org>
Cc: 4719 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Subject: Re: bug#4719: 23.1; M-& to run commands asynchronously (async-shell-command)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 23:48:08 -0700 (PDT)

Ok, let's see what's missing to do.
I saw following topics being discussed (summary here): http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/100293

- command can be in background or not: we have this
- the output might be visible or not
- a new buffer might be spawned for each process or not

Message #32 received at 4719 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> jurta.org>
To: dcl441-bugs <at> yahoo.com
Cc: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>, 4719 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#4719: 23.1;
	M-& to run commands asynchronously (async-shell-command)
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 21:57:12 +0300

> Ok, let's see what's missing to do.
> I saw following topics being discussed (summary here):
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/100293
>
> - command can be in background or not: we have this
> - the output might be visible or not
> - a new buffer might be spawned for each process or not

The problem with the design and implementation of this feature is that
there is too wide range of opinions and wishes.

So I propose a minimal change that just removes the current annoyance
where async-shell-command asks to kill the buffer instead of doing
something more constructive like creating a new buffer for running
another asynchronous command.

This is implemented in the patch below.

As for displaying the output buffer or not, I think this is the
responsibility of the window configuration system to decide whether
and where to display the output buffer.

=== modified file 'lisp/simple.el'
--- lisp/simple.el	2012-07-17 18:40:15 +0000
+++ lisp/simple.el	2012-07-17 18:55:25 +0000
@@ -2244,6 +2316,24 @@ (defun read-shell-command (prompt &optio
 	   (or hist 'shell-command-history)
 	   args)))
 
+(defcustom async-shell-command-buffer 'confirm-new-buffer
+  "What to do when the output buffer is used by another shell command.
+This option specifies how to resolve the conflict where a new command
+want to direct its output to the buffer `*Async Shell Command*',
+but this buffer is already taken by another running shell command."
+  :type '(choice (const :tag "Confirm killing of running command"
+			confirm-kill-process)
+		 (const :tag "Confirm renaming of existing buffer"
+			confirm-rename-buffer)
+		 (const :tag "Confirm creation of a new buffer"
+			confirm-new-buffer)
+		 (const :tag "Rename the existing buffer"
+			rename-buffer)
+		 (const :tag "Create a new buffer"
+			new-buffer))
+  :group 'shell
+  :version "24.2")
+
 (defun async-shell-command (command &optional output-buffer error-buffer)
   "Execute string COMMAND asynchronously in background.
 
@@ -2398,12 +2488,40 @@ (defun shell-command (command &optional
 		    proc)
 		;; Remove the ampersand.
 		(setq command (substring command 0 (match-beginning 0)))
-		;; If will kill a process, query first.
+		;; Ask the user what to do with already running process.
 		(setq proc (get-buffer-process buffer))
-		(if proc
+		(when proc
+		  (cond
+		   ((eq async-shell-command-buffer 'confirm-kill-process)
+		    ;; If will kill a process, query first.
 		    (if (yes-or-no-p "A command is running.  Kill it? ")
 			(kill-process proc)
 		      (error "Shell command in progress")))
+		   ((eq async-shell-command-buffer 'confirm-rename-buffer)
+		    ;; If will create a new buffer, query first.
+		    (if (yes-or-no-p "A command is running.  Rename its output buffer before running a new command? ")
+			(progn
+			  (with-current-buffer buffer
+			    (rename-uniquely))
+			  (setq buffer (get-buffer-create
+					(or output-buffer "*Async Shell Command*"))))
+		      (error "Shell command in progress")))
+		   ((eq async-shell-command-buffer 'confirm-new-buffer)
+		    ;; If will create a new buffer, query first.
+		    (if (yes-or-no-p "A command is running in the default buffer.  Run in a new buffer? ")
+			(setq buffer (generate-new-buffer
+				      (or output-buffer "*Async Shell Command*")))
+		      (error "Shell command in progress")))
+		   ((eq async-shell-command-buffer 'rename-buffer)
+		    ;; It will create a new buffer.
+		    (with-current-buffer buffer
+		      (rename-uniquely))
+		    (setq buffer (get-buffer-create
+				  (or output-buffer "*Async Shell Command*"))))
+		   ((eq async-shell-command-buffer 'new-buffer)
+		    ;; It will create a new buffer.
+		    (setq buffer (generate-new-buffer
+				  (or output-buffer "*Async Shell Command*"))))))
 		(with-current-buffer buffer
 		  (setq buffer-read-only nil)
 		  ;; Setting buffer-read-only to nil doesn't suffice

Message #35 received at 4719 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Chong Yidong <cyd <at> gnu.org>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> jurta.org>
Cc: dcl441-bugs <at> yahoo.com, Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>,
	4719 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#4719: 23.1;
	M-& to run commands asynchronously (async-shell-command)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 23:19:44 +0800

Juri Linkov <juri <at> jurta.org> writes:

> The problem with the design and implementation of this feature is that
> there is too wide range of opinions and wishes.
>
> So I propose a minimal change that just removes the current annoyance
> where async-shell-command asks to kill the buffer instead of doing
> something more constructive like creating a new buffer for running
> another asynchronous command.
>
> This is implemented in the patch below.

Patch looks fine to me.

Message #40 received at 4719-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Juri Linkov <juri <at> jurta.org>
To: Chong Yidong <cyd <at> gnu.org>
Cc: dcl441-bugs <at> yahoo.com, 4719-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
	Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Subject: Re: bug#4719: 23.1;
	M-& to run commands asynchronously (async-shell-command)
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2012 03:04:12 +0300

>> So I propose a minimal change that just removes the current annoyance
>> where async-shell-command asks to kill the buffer instead of doing
>> something more constructive like creating a new buffer for running
>> another asynchronous command.
>>
>> This is implemented in the patch below.
>
> Patch looks fine to me.

Installed and closed.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.