[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: kbash/kcsh
From:       Martin Konold <konold () alpha ! tat ! physik ! uni-tuebingen ! de>
Date:       1999-03-06 20:15:04
[Download RAW message or body]


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 13:01:30 +0100
Subject: Re: kbash/kcsh


I can not see the clear reasons why we should do this. The effects would
be marginal, since you can already do most of this with a decent shell.
Besides it will be seen as an attempt to also swallow the shells, just
like people erratically think that you have to use kwm.

On Fri, 5 Mar 1999, David Sweet wrote:
> Has anyone thought about a KDE shell recently?  It would be nice to have  a
> CLI that was integrated into the rest of the desktop. I can think of a few
> features I'd like:
>  	1) type in a nonexecutable file name and the default
> viewer/editor gets launched via kfmClient (or maybe a little popup asks you
> which viewer you want to use)

This would be a real hate feature for me. When I press enter, I know
pretty well, what I'm going to get. If your suggestion is implemented, the
outcome will be very different depending on where you are. Yes I know that
you can see it's a jpeg, if it's called flamebeer.jpg, but mime can tell
(and you can't) that flamebeer is also a jpeg.

> 	2) files/folders that have been viewed/edited from the shell get their
> URLs marked as visited in KFM

I have never been able to see the relevance of my fm telling me what
files/dirs I have visited anyway??

> 	3) New commands: cdback/cdfor for those of us getting used to browser
> back/forward buttons (ex: cd ~;cd /tmp;cdback leaves you in ~)

What's wrong with pushd / popd? Make an alias if you really want your
commands.

> 	4) Could send status info. to konsole (ex: to display the cwd in a
> konsole status bar or in caption)

Again I fail to see the actual benefits. I think it's just a feature you
won't actually gain anything from.

> 	5) Update open KFM windows when files are created, deleted, etc.
> (although the added information gained from a shell would certainly not be
> complete)

This I would like very much, but you do not need to write a new shell, you
could do it with a timer and a repeating check. I for one would not mind
this, as long as the timer is stopped, if there is no open windows. (Don't
know about the root icons here though.) There really should be a
notification mechanism in e2fs. (So, go patch that one instead :).

> Any comments?

It should be obvious, that I think this is an idea, which should not be
implemented.

--

Bo Thorsen             gobo@imada.ou.dk

Lahnsgade 31, st.      Unix systems administrator,
DK-5000 Odense C       Institute for Stat. and Dem.
Tlf: +45 66 11 83 85   University of Odense

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]