Im not doing it and Im not accepting patches for it.
Moving on.
Jason
On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 14:33 -0700, Mike Rooney wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Doug Aitken
> wrote:
> Since you constantly use the terminal why not alt tab to the
> terminal
>
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Doug Aitken wrote:
> Since you constantly use the terminal why not alt tab to the terminal
> window you have open and just do your command there?
>
I think this process is tedious especially if you have a lot of windows. I
love the AWN terminal applet because it
Going back to the original point of this post,
Since you constantly use the terminal why not alt tab to the terminal
window you have open and just do your command there?
I think in a way implementing this into Do kind of defeats the
purpose. Though I support the "piping" idea, just not sure how
I found this post because using gnome-do with Xubuntu. I can't seem
to do any thing useful with the "Run in terminal..." command.
I just began using gnome-do again because of docky. Really, I don't
care much about docky, but its a nice way to remember gnome-do is
there for others using my comp
Well, you can "pipe" output of one action to another.
Like I can upload a file to ImageShack, pipe the URL which is the output
into TinyURL, and then send that to Twitter or set it as my Pidgin status
all by "piping" output to actions. All you have to do is use an action that
returns output as som
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Chris Szikszoy wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 15:13 -0600, Joshua Gardner wrote:
>
> While not adding a terminal to Do, what about having the ability to capture
> the output from a command in the Selected Text buffer in Do?
>
> That's not such a bad idea. It woul
> Just to be clear, I did say *minimizing* it, so it wouldn't be cluttering
> the screen while it's still running.
True.
I don't know why I find the idea of having the terminal built into to
the panel/dock so fascinating.
When I have the terminal window open I have to remember in what
workspace
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 14:59, baldurpet wrote:
> > I don't understand how this would be any different than opening a
> Terminal
> > window and minimizing it to Docky. Except for maybe a keyboard shortcut.
>
> Except when you stop using it it goes away and doesn't clutter your
> screen, even tho
Done
https://bugs.launchpad.net/do-plugins/+bug/348291
-Josh
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Chris Szikszoy wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 15:13 -0600, Joshua Gardner wrote:
>
> While not adding a terminal to Do, what about having the ability to capture
> the output from a command in the Sele
On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 15:13 -0600, Joshua Gardner wrote:
> While not adding a terminal to Do, what about having the ability to
> capture the output from a command in the Selected Text buffer in Do?
That's not such a bad idea. It would definitely be possible.
>
> So I can run something like, oh
While not adding a terminal to Do, what about having the ability to capture
the output from a command in the Selected Text buffer in Do?
So I can run something like, oh, I dunno, `date`, and have the output
available to Google, or open a file, or tweet, or whatever else I can
possibly think to do
So far, the use cases you mention are satisfied by the GNOMETerminal
plugin.
Do is meant to be the glue between activities on your computer, not a
replacement for the activities themselves; we really do not want Do to
become a monolithic app, I even argued against adding a calendar yo
Doc
> I don't understand how this would be any different than opening a Terminal
> window and minimizing it to Docky. Except for maybe a keyboard shortcut.
Except when you stop using it it goes away and doesn't clutter your
screen, even though it keeps running. I could see how this would prove
useful
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 13:54, baldurpet wrote:
> I don't understand what you mean by the text editing abilities of Do?
> What I'm simply talking about is to allow Do to use gnome-terminal, it
> doesn't even need to be like I suggested maybe something like this
> http://thelinuxmovement.blogspot.
> From what i understand the text editing abilities of Do are not near
> good enough for a terminal.
> and it would take alot of work to add them.
>
> perhaps there is an easier way to implement that by embeding bonobo
> components?
>
> In the mean time if you want quick access to a terminal at a
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 1:47 PM, baldurpet wrote:Well for one this wouldn't require opening a whole window if you only
want to use one command.What about the "Run in Terminal" action?-- --Alex Launi
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Mar 24, 1:10 pm, Alex Launi wrote:
> I don't see what advantage this gives over just launching the terminal with
> Do.
Well for one this wouldn't require opening a whole window if you only
want to use one command.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message
>From what i understand the text editing abilities of Do are not near
good enough for a terminal.
and it would take alot of work to add them.
perhaps there is an easier way to implement that by embeding bonobo components?
In the mean time if you want quick access to a terminal at all times
maybe
I don't see what advantage this gives over just launching the terminal with
Do.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"GNOME Do" group.
To post to this group, send email to gnome-do@googlegroups.com
To unsub
Ok there appears to be some problem with the links;
First link = http://img23.imageshack.us/my.php?image=docky1.png
Second link = http://img23.imageshack.us/my.php?image=docky2.png
(also, the quote was supposed to be "why not add the two together?")
--~--~-~--~~~---~
20 matches
Mail list logo
