From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Welle Subject: Re: ob-shell, output and continuation prompts Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 14:06:19 +0100 Message-ID: <87mv368sdw.fsf@luisa.c0t0d0s0.de> References: <87tvxea8x3.fsf@luisa.c0t0d0s0.de> <87o9nm1rt6.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51156) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJfam-0002zT-LC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:06:33 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJfah-0005Me-4B for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:06:28 -0500 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:57080) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJfag-0005Lu-Q7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:06:23 -0500 Received: from stella.c0t0d0s0.de ([194.95.66.1]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MJmcS-1eIZ7w3H3U-001BX6 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 14:06:20 +0100 Received: from Stella (stella.c0t0d0s0.de [192.168.42.1]) by stella.c0t0d0s0.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF6FCC419C for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 14:06:19 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <87o9nm1rt6.fsf@gmail.com> (Eric S. Fraga's message of "Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:00:37 +0000") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello Eric, Eric S Fraga writes: > On Tuesday, 28 Nov 2017 at 13:23, Michael Welle wrote: >> I think that last one is what one would expect ;). Anyways, using sessions, >> is there a way to get rid off of the shell's continuation prompts? > > PS2="" > > in the shell script? does that work for you? I had to evaluate (add-to-list 'tramp-remote-process-environment "PS2=> "). Otherwise tramp/emacs would wait forever after sending the first line of the for loop. Regards hmw