Re: help with M-x term

[William Daffer]

op132650c@mail.telepac.pt writes:

>>   Is there some reason why you aren't using M-x shell?
>
> I don't want to detour the attention about the question of William
> Daffer, but i also prefer M-x term instead of M-x shell, because the
> output of M-x shell is not well formatted compared to M-x term.
>
> Now i put the following question:
>
> What's the difference between M-x shell and M-x term?

  M-x term actually does terminal emulation where M-x shell
  doesn't. At least that's the only difference I see from 'info emacs
  shell'


>
> How can i configure M-x shell to be well formatted?
>
> One example of the bad formatation of the output of M-x shell, is
> when i do ls -la.  I get the following:
>
> ]]] file1     ]]] file3^]]]     ]]] file5^]]]
>  ]]] file2   ]]] file4^]]]     ]]] file6^]]]
>
>
> With the M-x term i get well formatted:
>
> file1   file3   file5
> file2   file4   file6
>

  I think that's the point of M-x term, or at least one of them.

  Me, I don't care about formatting when I'm using a shell inside
  emacs. I do it so infrequently and for such small things I just live
  with bad formatting. 

  But that may change.

 [snip]

whd
-- 
RESPLENDENT, adj.  Like a simple American citizen beduking himself in 
his lodge, or affirming his consequence in the Scheme of Things as an 
elemental unit of a parade.
        The Knights of Dominion were so resplendent in their velvet- 
    and-gold that their masters would hardly have known them.
                                           "Chronicles of the Classes"
        -- Ambrose Bierce: _The Devil's Dictionary_