On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 02:24:15PM -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:
>> transcript > FILE
>> transcript >> FILE
>> transcript | COMMAND
Daniel> I don't like this syntax very much. It looks too much like
Daniel> dumping the output of a command ("transcript") to the file,
Daniel> not like a redirection for the future output.
Good point.
Daniel> Also - is piping to a command actually useful?
I don't know. I haven't even been running with this patch in place,
since the feature in general is only occasionally useful to me. I
thought I saw a request for this (piping to a command)?
Daniel> Hmm... How do you feel about:
Daniel> transcript [-append] FILE
Daniel> tee [-append] FILE
Daniel> Where transcript replaces ">" and ">>"?
That looks good to me. Or even `transcript [-tee] [-append] FILE'.
Or maybe `[-notee]', with tee as the default.
I'd rather have tee as the default, also. But -notee doesn't look
right, so I left it as two commands. Anyone else out on the list have
a suggestion?
Does the `transcript FILE' command send both the user input (prompts?)
and output to the file (output also to the console)? Like unix script?