[GRASS5] [bug #3710] (grass) store GUI commands in Grass history - same as CLI

GRASS GIS GRASS GIS developer
1

First of all - I'm changing the subject so it reflects what I mean better.
Sorry for missunderstanding. Please read below.

Michael Barton wrote:

Although the d.m layers don't write to the command history upon display,they
CAN be saved as a "group".

I don't mean to store the d.m layer-command into history, only the command
invoked from GUI.

I mean this, eg.: I call v.out.ogr&, GUI pops up, I select options, execute
and the full command syntax is stored in the Grass history - like if I called
the command from CLI.

Glynn, does this change anything? Do the limitations for d.m layer commands
you described apply to Grass commands invoked from their GUIs too? Or could
they be stored in Grass history easier than d.m commands?

To get the commands to save to the command history, you'd need to write a
shell script with the same commands. This is pretty easy because, when you
push the display button, all the commands get written to the terminal.

When talking of this - it is an annoying feature actually IMO. d.m should not
mess with main Grass terminal. Grass terminal should be left for CLI only if
possible.

Maciek

-------------------------------------------- Managed by Request Tracker

2

Maciek Sieczka via RT wrote:

First of all - I'm changing the subject so it reflects what I mean better.
Sorry for missunderstanding. Please read below.

Michael Barton wrote:

> Although the d.m layers don't write to the command history upon display,they
> CAN be saved as a "group".

I don't mean to store the d.m layer-command into history, only the command
invoked from GUI.

I mean this, eg.: I call v.out.ogr&, GUI pops up, I select options, execute
and the full command syntax is stored in the Grass history - like if I called
the command from CLI.

Glynn, does this change anything? Do the limitations for d.m layer commands
you described apply to Grass commands invoked from their GUIs too?

Yes.

Or could they be stored in Grass history easier than d.m commands?

It's problematic for anything other than the shell itself to write to
its history file.

> To get the commands to save to the command history, you'd need to write a
> shell script with the same commands. This is pretty easy because, when you
> push the display button, all the commands get written to the terminal.

When talking of this - it is an annoying feature actually IMO. d.m should not
mess with main Grass terminal. Grass terminal should be left for CLI only if
possible.

It isn't d.m that's doing it, but the commands which it runs. By
default, processes inherit their standard output from their parent, so
if you start d.m from an xterm, then d.m runs some commands, those
commands will use the xterm for their output.

It would be trivial for d.m to redirect the output elsewhere; the
issue is in deciding where. Or the user can redirect the output
themself, e.g.

  d.m &> out.log & # all output to a file
or
  xterm -e d.m & # all output to a new xterm

--
Glynn Clements <glynn@gclements.plus.com>