Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<3C210FB0.9060809@ece.gatech.edu>
Date:	Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:07:44 -0500
From:	Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language:	en-us
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	John Morrison <john DOT r DOT morrison AT ntlworld DOT com>
CC:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: bash completion (was: RE: Units)
References:	<NLEGIGLCGEEOHJGJBGPOOECBCJAA DOT john DOT r DOT morrison AT ntlworld DOT com>

Sorry -- I didn't mirror the whole site, just the software.  However, 
this guy:
   http://shelluser.net/~giles/bashprompt/prompts/index.html
has a bunch of screen caps of various prompts, and many are taken from 
the BashPrompt Themes package (that's the real name for what I called 
"bashprompt").  You can also download just the prompt scripts from the 
shelluser page.  The BashPrompt Themes package is much more heavyweight, 
and may not be appropriate for inclusion in your cygwin package.  Maybe 
you could just grab the prompt scripts themselves and put those in your 
package...

--Chuck


John Morrison wrote:

> Err, what is bash prompt?  Your mirror doesn't say and I can't connect to
> the original site...
> 
> J.
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
>>[mailto:cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com]On Behalf Of Charles Wilson
>>Sent: Wednesday, 19 December 2001 5:54 pm
>>To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
>>Subject: Re: bash completion (was: RE: Units)
>>
>>
>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>
>>
>>>That's where I would be leaning, too.  I think it makes sense to include
>>>the completions in bash.  Or maybe in shellutils?
>>>
>>>The only problem with this that I can see is that they'll be
>>>
>>more "hidden"
>>
>>>there.  If they are a separate setup.exe package then it is more likely
>>>that someone will notice them and say "Hey, cool!" and install them.
>>>
>>>If they just slide in with a bash installation then, unless we make them
>>>the default, it's more likely that people won't know what they
>>>
>>have unless
>>
>>>they're reminded about it on the mailing list (or whereever).
>>>
>>>Hmm.  Maybe I just convinced myself that they belong as a
>>>
>>separate package.
>>
>>How about this:
>>John, why don't you create a "bashutils" package, to serve as a
>>collection of (moderately) useful bash scripts and settings.  For now,
>>it could contain only bashcompletion, but later you could add -- oh,
>>bashprompt, or something...
>>
>>I'm thinking something like my cygutils package, which is just a grab
>>bag of very simple (single-source-file) utilities.
>>
>>(FYI, you can find bashprompt here...
>>http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/unversioned/bashprompt/
>>the official site is completely flaky, so I mirrored it)
>>
>>--Chuck
>>
>>
> 

- Raw text -