Yeah, ok, I've read the complete bug report this time. But you're still writing weird things from my point of view. ;)
Sh isn't a file/mimetype, so I don't understand why there is a need for a default handler. Also, the command is starting sh, so why would someone want to start a terminal-emulator instead? Moreover, I just tried on Xfce and GNOME to run (alt+f2) "sh -c 'echo foo'", and it doesn't start a sh handler, even on GNOME, so I'm even more confused.
A more correct way might be to do something like:
x-terminal-emulator -e sh -i -c 'ecryptfs-unwrap-passphrase $HOME/.ecryptfs/wrapped-passphrase 2>/dev/null && echo [Enter] && head -n1 && touch $HOME/.ecryptfs/.wrapped-passphrase.recorded '
This would start a terminal emulator, as expected...
Yeah, ok, I've read the complete bug report this time. But you're still writing weird things from my point of view. ;)
Sh isn't a file/mimetype, so I don't understand why there is a need for a default handler. Also, the command is starting sh, so why would someone want to start a terminal-emulator instead? Moreover, I just tried on Xfce and GNOME to run (alt+f2) "sh -c 'echo foo'", and it doesn't start a sh handler, even on GNOME, so I'm even more confused.
A more correct way might be to do something like: unwrap- passphrase $HOME/. ecryptfs/ wrapped- passphrase 2>/dev/null && echo [Enter] && head -n1 && touch $HOME/. ecryptfs/ .wrapped- passphrase. recorded '
x-terminal-emulator -e sh -i -c 'ecryptfs-
This would start a terminal emulator, as expected...