Re: idea for new feature (was: Re: sticky-note and zle bindings)

["Richard Hartmann" <richih.mailinglist@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 02:26, Benjamin R. Haskell <zsh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


> I don't see the advantage or difference yet (except the "on a different
> level" part -- the 'screen' way makes more sense to me at this point).

For example, you can not space out screen windows over terminal
emulator tabs. Also, you can not run a screen session across a reboot
which works just fine with a ID thing.


> Perusing the previous thread made me wonder: Is there a solution for the
> problem of needing co-operation from, say, the X Window manager? Or have you
> settled on being able to pass in a dead/killed shell's UUID/GUID?

What would you neec X for? The TE sets the variable in the environment and
invokes the shell, which takes over from there.


> (Is there an alternate interface to the online mailing list archive, btw? I
> hate all the clicking around -- I'd rather download an .mbox file and use it
> in Alpine.)

I forwarded you the full thread. Is Alpine a proper replacement for pine, now?
I heard of pain when Alpine was born.


> But, won't this also be a problem with whatever mechanism you're
> envisioning? Or is this beyond the scope of what you'd want your "thing" to
> do (re-attaching already-running programs)?

Re-attaching is outside the scope of this. One could think about using a
mechanism like retty or simply stopping the execution of the 'child',
pivoting STDIN, STDOUT and STDERR from under its feet and letting
it run again, but that confuses a _lot_ of programs (for the obvious reason
that this is something you normally do not anticipate).


Richard