[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Relation between the value of shell-file-name and explicit-shell-fi
From: |
Stuart D. Herring |
Subject: |
Re: Relation between the value of shell-file-name and explicit-shell-file-name |
Date: |
Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:33:15 -0800 (PST) |
User-agent: |
SquirrelMail/1.4.8-2.el3.7lanl |
> What is the relation between the values of these two variables? Could
> the doc strings please mention something about it? (Does
> explicit-shell-file-name override shell-file-name for explicitly
> requested shells? Are those the shells started with M-x shell? )
`explicit-shell-file-name' is only ever used by M-x shell. It does
(or explicit-shell-file-name
(getenv "ESHELL") shell-file-name)
which obviously prefers $ESHELL to `shell-file-name' and
`explicit-shell-file-name' to $ESHELL. Note that it was different in
Emacs 21:
(or explicit-shell-file-name
(getenv "ESHELL")
(getenv "SHELL")
"/bin/sh")
Here `shell-file-name' is absent. The idea is that e-s-f-n is the
"personal" shell and s-f-n is the "utility" shell used by such things as
M-! and (unless you customize `ediff-shell') M-x ediff.
What do you want added to e-s-f-n's doc string to clarify this?
Davis
--
This product is sold by volume, not by mass. If it appears too dense or
too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during
shipping.