It's somewhat funny how everybody keeps using "foot -e <command>" to run something in foot, when -e has never, ever, been required by foot.
In fact, we initially refused to recognize -e as a valid option, but added it to improve compatibility with other terminals.
But our own documentation has never suggested using -e.
dnkl :emacs: /
npub1vk…6vfn8
2024-04-19 08:31:39
Author Public Key
npub1vkcg36heql74hknzdajkz8jxk39ervhmy24cqjhr4g3rdluqnx8sw6vfn8Published at
2024-04-19 08:31:39Event JSON
{
"id": "f557343c4d10397f1db55e27e5e60ed713cd90d6639497c3d2f7f5bf543f3a7d",
"pubkey": "65b088eaf907fd5bda626f65611e46b44b91b2fb22ab804ae3aa2236ff80998f",
"created_at": 1713515499,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"proxy",
"https://linuxrocks.online/users/dnkl/statuses/112296951770112928",
"activitypub"
]
],
"content": "It's somewhat funny how everybody keeps using \"foot -e \u003ccommand\u003e\" to run something in foot, when -e has never, ever, been required by foot. \n\nIn fact, we initially refused to recognize -e as a valid option, but added it to improve compatibility with other terminals. \n\nBut our own documentation has never suggested using -e.",
"sig": "126b98ca0ced87e2d4acaaffb430800e936842a10a668a4bb992c8dd3bc5c63314aea33541b0e64fc860117cf81a75df4dc3f2407b4b85082bc9cc928ebf46a7"
}