screen-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: order of flags


From: James
Subject: Re: order of flags
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:04:42 -0400

cool! thanks for the research-- it's the best reply i've gotten in a while!
cheers,

_J

On 7/26/08, Micah Cowan <address@hidden> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>
>  James wrote:
>  > hello,
>  > just wanted to know why the following command gives:
>  >
>  > $ screen -RRx
>  > There is no screen to be attached.
>  >
>  > whereas typing:
>  >
>  > $ screen -xRR
>  >
>  > gives a new screen session. (or attaches to an existing one with multiuser 
> mode)
>  >
>  > at the moment i'm using the second command as my "always run screen
>  > like this"  favorite...
>  >
>  > wasn't sure if this was a bug or a weirdism of screen.
>  > let me know your thoughts or i should be doing something differently, 
> thanks.
>
>
> Looking at the code:
>
>  ...
>                 case 'r':
>                 case 'R':
>  #ifdef MULTI
>                 case 'x':
>  #endif
>                   if (ac > 1 && *av[1] != '-' && !SockMatch)
>                     {
>                       SockMatch = *++av;
>                       ac--;
>                       debug2("rflag=%d, SockMatch=%s\n", dflag, SockMatch);
>                     }
>  #ifdef MULTI
>                   if (*ap == 'x')
>                     xflag = 1;
>  #endif
>                   if (rflag)
>                     rflag = 2;
>                   rflag += (*ap == 'R') ? 2 : 1;
>                   break;
>  ...
>
>  It appears that -x always includes the functionality of specifying -r; so
>         screen -RRx
>  is the same as
>         screen -xRr
>  In both versions, rflag ends up at 3, whereas with
>         screen -xRR
>  rflag ends up at 4, just like -RR.
>
>  I don't know enough about rflag to know the full meaning of this. I'm
>  not certain what was intended, but I'm guessing -x was intended to imply
>  - -r on its own, but messing with existing -r/-R combos wasn't intentional.
>
>  I've filed an issue for this at
>  https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?23939
>
>  - --
>  Micah J. Cowan
>  Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer,
>  and GNU Wget Project Maintainer.
>  http://micah.cowan.name/
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>  Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>  Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>  iD8DBQFIi24H7M8hyUobTrERAlfaAKCFdjjpUZDL9XIXWH6YhZCDYm6wawCdHqvD
>  udn1TmlzNmeOrACvyRyAAhs=
>  =LAb8
>  -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]