Re: What I'm missing when using M-x shell

[Jonathan Groll]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 10:27:47AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
> [ please CC me when replying to me ]
>
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 7:34 PM, Dan Espen
> <daneNO@more.mk.spamtelcordia.com> wrote:
> > Compiles are M-x compile, greps are M-x grep,
> > ls is dired, email is MH-E.
>
> But what would you suggest as replacement for:
>
> $ make && gdb || mail -s "Compilation failed" home
>
> More generally sh scripts allow automatisation processes that you
> can't simply do with emacs commands, it similar to using a mouse
> actually. I don't think you can get rid of them.
>
> Futhermore there are a lot of tools out there that are not integrated
> to emacs if you do so, you don't have enough keys on the keyboard to
> create bindings ;)
>
> So I don't think you can realistically get rid of a shell
>
> > Maybe most emacs users aren't that committed to M-x shell and
> > it's friends.
>
> Probably.
>
> So for now I don't think I can forget Gnu Screen: one screen to handle
> a terminal with a shell where all my ncurse based applications can
> work properly and another screen where emacs lives.

On the subject of GNU screen and emacs: Bill Clementson wrote a good
entry on using emacsclient and screen -
http://bc.tech.coop/blog/071001.html

Regarding mutt with emacs, there is a page on the emacswiki you may
want to read:
http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/emacs-en/MuttInEmacs

It may also possibly be necessary to adjust the colour scheme used in
.muttrc:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mutt-users@mutt.org/msg21810.html

Personally, I have been using gnu-screen with an emacs server running
in one window and mutt in another window, based on what Bill
Clementson wrote.

Regards,
Jonathan