Should we keep xfterm4

[Mike Massonnet]

Mon, 23 Oct 2006 22:51:13 +0200 - "Stephan Arts" <psybsd at gmail.com>
wrote :

> On 10/23/06, Olivier Fourdan <fourdan at xfce.org> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Olivier Fourdan wrote:
> > > Olivier Fourdan wrote:
> > >>> Now that both exo and Terminal are part of xfce, what's the use
> > >>> of xfterm4 anymore?
> > >>>
> > >>> xfterm4 is a derivative of xfterm, a simple shell wrapper I
> > >>> added in xfce 3.x maybe 6 or 7 years ago...
> > >>>
> > >>> Let's get rid of it. At last as it is right now. Let just keep
> > >>> a wrapper to "exo-open --launch TerminalEmulator"...
> > >
> > > I forgot to mention that the current implementation fails because
> > > of the "$ESTRING" and causes the following error...
> > >
> > > Option "--execute/-x" requires specifying the command to run on
> > > the rest of the command line
> > >
> > > So we need to do something about that anyway, thus my proposal to
> > > over simplify xfterm4.
> >
> > Ok, I've commited my changes/fixes, these scripts are deprecated
> > anyway.
> 
> I am just curious, why do we keep them around for 4.4 then?
> 

  AFAIR the launcher plugin in xfce4-panel uses xfterm4 when an item is
set to "run in terminal".

> Cheers,
> 
> Stephan


Cheers,
Mike
-- 
 http://massonnet.org/ Mike Massonnet (mmassonnet)        _
                                                       ,_( ))___     (`
 GnuPG 0--" 0xF8C80F97                                  \'    _ `\    )
 C4DA 431D 52F9 F930 3E5B  3E3D 546C 89D9 F8C8 0F97     =`---<___/---' 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.xfce.org/pipermail/xfce4-dev/attachments/20061024/058acb5c/attachment.pgp>