On 2011-01-25 14:48, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 08:32:42 -0500, Lars T. Kyllingstad
> <public@kyllingen.nospamnet> wrote:
>
>
>> Does it look in the executable directory on Linux too? If so, does that
>> take precedence over /etc/dmd.conf and environment variables?
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/dmd-linux.html#dmd_conf
>
> -Steve

Oh, /etc/ will be last, nice.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 2011-01-25 12:58, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 10:46:45 +0200, Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:
>
>> But the problem is the bash scripts, I'm not sure if a Windows version
>> is possible.
>
> For what it's worth, I'm a FAR Manager user, and I've written myself a
> FAR plugin to solve this problem (and for other toolkits too):
>
> http://blog.thecybershadow.net/2010/04/02/envman-far-plugin-to-manage-your-environment/

I'll have a look at that.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

Personally I use Console2, and I've a hotkey to open a DMD session (it
just adds DMD to path really).

On 2011-01-25 12:58, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 10:46:45 +0200, Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:
>
>> But the problem is the bash scripts, I'm not sure if a Windows version
>> is possible.
>
> For what it's worth, I'm a FAR Manager user, and I've written myself a
> FAR plugin to solve this problem (and for other toolkits too):
>
> http://blog.thecybershadow.net/2010/04/02/envman-far-plugin-to-manage-your-environment/

I don't event recognize what language that is written in. Is that reading and writing to the registry?

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

It's good old Pascal, much hated by C wizards. :D

Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> Platforms: currently only Posix
> 
	Nitpick: it is more restricted than that. Platform is currently
only posix *with bash shell*. A lot of people use other shells,
including non-Bourne shells (most frequent are zsh, ksh and tcsh).

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeberger@free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger@jabber.fr

On 2011-01-25 17:12, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> It's good old Pascal, much hated by C wizards. :D

Well, that explains, a lot :)

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 2011-01-25 20:33, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
> Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> Platforms: currently only Posix
>>
> 	Nitpick: it is more restricted than that. Platform is currently
> only posix *with bash shell*. A lot of people use other shells,
> including non-Bourne shells (most frequent are zsh, ksh and tcsh).
>
> 		Jerome

Yeah, I guess you're right, didn't think there were a lot people who used other shells. Since I almost know nothing about shell scripting and even less about non-bourne shells, will it be possible to port to other shells? How much do they differ?

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

Jacob Carlborg wrote:

> On 2011-01-25 20:33, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
>> Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>> Platforms: currently only Posix
>>>
>> Nitpick: it is more restricted than that. Platform is currently only posix *with bash shell*. A lot of people use other shells, including non-Bourne shells (most frequent are zsh, ksh and tcsh).
>>
>> Jerome
> 
> Yeah, I guess you're right, didn't think there were a lot people who used other shells. Since I almost know nothing about shell scripting and even less about non-bourne shells, will it be possible to port to other shells? How much do they differ?
> 

I know it's possible to hit some pretty common subset that works in most shells, though I don't have any experience. There is a posix specification for shells, bash is supposed to follow that if ran as sh:

http://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/Bash-POSIX-Mode.html

There are entire books an the subject, this is a nice small article about the common stuff: http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/34658

Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2011-01-25 20:33, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
>> Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>> Platforms: currently only Posix
>>>
>>     Nitpick: it is more restricted than that. Platform is currently
>> only posix *with bash shell*. A lot of people use other shells,
>> including non-Bourne shells (most frequent are zsh, ksh and tcsh).
>>
>>         Jerome
> 
> Yeah, I guess you're right, didn't think there were a lot people who used other shells. Since I almost know nothing about shell scripting and even less about non-bourne shells, will it be possible to port to other shells? How much do they differ?
> 
	Well, for other Bourne shells (like zsh or ksh), it will probably
mostly be a question of putting the initialization code in the right
file (i.e. .zshrc or .kshrc). Other than that, unless you are doing
something pretty fancy, the same code should work.

	For C-shells (like tcsh) the syntax is pretty different, so it will
probably require more changes. However, it has been a while since I
last used tcsh, so I cannot tell you how much work it would be.

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeberger@free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger@jabber.fr