Re: [UX] real names exposed

2016-09-07 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Eric Bavier skribis: > On Sun, 04 Sep 2016 21:41:01 +0200 > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote: > >> While playing with ‘wrap-program’, I rewrote it so create a single >> wrapper and modify that wrapper when it exists instead of layering an >> extra wrapper. >> >> Thoughts? If there are no ob

Re: [UX] real names exposed

2016-09-05 Thread Eric Bavier
On Sun, 04 Sep 2016 21:41:01 +0200 l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote: > While playing with ‘wrap-program’, I rewrote it so create a single > wrapper and modify that wrapper when it exists instead of layering an > extra wrapper. > > Thoughts? If there are no objections, I’d like to commit this

Re: [UX] real names exposed

2016-09-04 Thread Ludovic Courtès
While playing with ‘wrap-program’, I rewrote it so create a single wrapper and modify that wrapper when it exists instead of layering an extra wrapper. Thoughts? If there are no objections, I’d like to commit this one. Thanks, Ludo’. modified guix/build/utils.scm @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ ;;; GNU Guix

Re: [UX] real names exposed

2016-09-04 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Troy Sankey skribis: > I suspect the scope of this UX "bug" is larger than python. I think this > probably affects every executable written in an interpreted > language and using a shebang. Exactly, that’s also the conclusion that I reached. :-/ Ludo’.

Re: [UX] real names exposed

2016-09-03 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis: > $ sh -c 'exec -a FOO > /gnu/store/6vmniz83k46l8jpry50wdvwxsncz1r5w-khal-0.7.0/bin/.khal-wrap-01 > --version' > .khal-real, version 0.7.0 What happens is that ‘exec -a’ is doesn’t work when the wrapped program is a script. This is because, when

Re: [UX] real names exposed

2016-09-03 Thread Troy Sankey
I suspect the scope of this UX "bug" is larger than python. I think this probably affects every executable written in an interpreted language and using a shebang. Here's another example with a bash script: $ cat > t.sh #!/bin/bash sed 's/\x0/\\0/g' # replaces null bytes with a visible '\

Re: [UX] real names exposed

2016-09-03 Thread Troy Sankey
Quoting Ludovic Courtès (2016-09-01 04:59:02) > ‘exec -a’ works as advertised: > > --8<---cut here---start->8--- > $ sh -c 'exec -a FOO guile -c "(pk (command-line))"' > > ;;; (("FOO")) > --8<---cut here---end--->8--- So, he

Re: [UX] real names exposed

2016-09-01 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Eric Bavier skribis: > On 2016-08-31 18:11, Leo Famulari wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 02:25:49PM -0400, Troy Sankey wrote: >>> I understand why this happens: >>> >>> % khal --help >>> Usage: .khal-real [OPTIONS] COMMAND [ARGS]... >>> [...] >>> >>> but I think it sorta sucks for user ex

Re: [UX] real names exposed

2016-08-31 Thread Eric Bavier
On 2016-08-31 18:11, Leo Famulari wrote: On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 02:25:49PM -0400, Troy Sankey wrote: I understand why this happens: % khal --help Usage: .khal-real [OPTIONS] COMMAND [ARGS]... [...] but I think it sorta sucks for user experience. Just thought I'd point this out, and I

Re: [UX] real names exposed

2016-08-31 Thread Leo Famulari
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 02:25:49PM -0400, Troy Sankey wrote: > I understand why this happens: > > % khal --help > Usage: .khal-real [OPTIONS] COMMAND [ARGS]... > [...] > > but I think it sorta sucks for user experience. Just thought I'd point this > out, and I was wondering if there were a

[UX] real names exposed

2016-08-31 Thread Troy Sankey
I understand why this happens: % khal --help Usage: .khal-real [OPTIONS] COMMAND [ARGS]... [...] but I think it sorta sucks for user experience. Just thought I'd point this out, and I was wondering if there were any ideas to address this. Specifically, argv[0] references the name of the "