You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Per #16786 (Dec 2016) it seems that the initial implementation (#10574) of RunInTerminalRequest wasn't able to provide the processId field in its RunInTerminalResponse.
Any chance that subsequent developments might make this feasible now? For example, #14286 looked like it could be relevant.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It is not possible to return the process id of the command that runs in the shell.
With the fix for #14286 it is possible to get the process id of the shell, but not of the command that runs inside the shell.
I see no way how to fix this.
Please note: depending on the command being run in shell, it still might be possible to find the process id of the command. E.g. for node.js the debug adapter launches node.js with the "RunInTerminal" request and if that was successful it has a debug connection to node.js. This makes it possible to get the process id by evaluating a process.pid expression.
However, VS Code's implementation of the "RunInTerminal" request cannot use that approach because it does not know anything about the command being run.
So maybe give us the process id of the shell? Then since we're in control of what command it's running, perhaps in some cases it'll be possible to determine the command's process id (e.g. looking for child processes?). Just a thought...
@gjsjohnmurray I agree that returning the shell's id is better than nothing.
But I cannot return this id under the processId attribute because existing debug adapters would expect the command's id here.
I suggest that you create a feature request for adding a "shellProcessId" at https://github.com/Microsoft/debug-adapter-protocol/issues.
Per #16786 (Dec 2016) it seems that the initial implementation (#10574) of RunInTerminalRequest wasn't able to provide the processId field in its RunInTerminalResponse.
Any chance that subsequent developments might make this feasible now? For example, #14286 looked like it could be relevant.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: