Switching shells question Thread last updated on 2003-03-21 07:37:56

Posted by member 17259 on 2003-03-19 17:19:18

Hey gang,

With Litestep simplicity loading as my default shell on startup, I seem to get some "interesting" behavior upon using LSTS to subsequently select "Explorer" as my shell.

Now, I understand that there will be quirky behavior, and I also understand that I shouldn't be swapping shells like that without some more experience with Litestep. Given that, how do I switch BACK away from Explorer to Litestep simplicity?

Put plainly: I boot with simplicity as the shell, I then behave like an ass and switch to Explorer using LSTS. Now how do I turn Explorer off and go back to simplicity without rebooting?

Thanks in advance, and sorry if this has been asked before.

Prospero

Posted by member 11869 on 2003-03-19 17:28:03 link

First: What OS are you using?
If Win98:
As far as I'm aware, there is no easy way to do this other than to change the system.ini back to the line by removing the ";" from
;shell=c:\litestep\litestep.exe
and placing the ";" back in front of
shell=c:\windows\explorer.exe

then save system.ini and LogOff. This is the only way I know to do this without having to reboot.

Someone else will have to fill you in for WinXP or NT cause I don;t use either of those OS's myself.

Posted by member 6470 on 2003-03-19 17:28:26 link

run lsts.exe and select a theme, it'll switch you back to ls...

(I never even realized lsts let you do that... I did it to myself just now, and all I had to do to get LS back was select a theme again)

Posted by member 17259 on 2003-03-19 17:33:31 link

NeMeSiS:
Sorry - should have included system info. I'm running XP Professional.

eman:
Just so we're clear...you're saying after clicking the Explorer button (and thus switching from LiteStep to the Explorer Shell) you are able to run lsts.exe successfully? Radical - it blows up all over the place if I try that. I'll give it another shot though, and tell you how it goes.

Posted by member 1316 on 2003-03-19 17:37:01 link

prospero-if it doesn't work for you, you could try getting the latest indie build. eman may have a newer build than you, which could explain why it works for him, and not for you. but if it still doesn't work, then logging off and logging back on should do the trick too.

Posted by member 15023 on 2003-03-19 18:09:42 link

You can do what I do and create a new windows xp user, so that one user uses the litestep shell and the other one uses the explorer shell. Then instead of rebooting to change shells, you can have both shells and just use log off to change from Litestep to Explorer. Just a thought.

Posted by member 17259 on 2003-03-19 18:31:28 link

Mr. White:
Probably the best idea - I'm just poking around the dusty corners and seeing what happens, though, so I thought I'd see if anyone else has been down this path.

Deuce:
I'm the latest and greatest indie build - but yea, point taken. The implication of the "Explorer" button on the LSTS UI would seem to be that you could switch shells on the fly without too much trouble. I was interested to see whether I just didn't know the magic steps to take, or whether it really is an iffy proposition

eman:
Personally, I get unpredictable behavior upon trying to execute LSTS after switching from Litestep to Explorer as the shell. I can tell that this isn't something I'm going to be pursuing, since switching to Explorer from LiteStep is essentially invoking another instance of Explorer and Explorer Shell complains bitterly when it tries to start up a number of applications (they're already running, after all :)

Thanks for the input, all. I'm sure I'll have more questions as the week drags on (and I do my best to avoid doing actual work)

Prospero

Posted by member 831 on 2003-03-20 19:56:55 link

You should use a shell-switching program...makes life a whole lot simpler.

I use Shell-On (version 2)...

Posted by member 6470 on 2003-03-21 01:00:49 link

or, another option, you can re-run Omar's Installer, and it gives you the option of just setting LS as the shell again.

Prospero- I did it myself, but it could be the difference is that I run win2k

Posted by member 333 on 2003-03-21 07:37:56 link

ShellOn v3 beta works damn fine. And it doesn't have all the extra stuff that is in version 2.