From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/37307 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai =?iso-8859-1?q?Gro=DFjohann?=) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: gnus-delay.el needs to understand "linefeed" for the sake of xterm Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:56:57 +0200 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035172743 13180 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:59:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:59:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org Return-Path: Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 21455 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 08:57:37 -0000 Original-Received: from waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de (129.217.4.42) by gnus.org with SMTP; 31 Jul 2001 08:57:37 -0000 Original-Received: from lothlorien.cs.uni-dortmund.de (lothlorien.cs.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.19.67]) by waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de with ESMTP id KAA28164; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:56:58 +0200 (MES) Original-Received: from lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de (lucy [129.217.19.80]) by lothlorien.cs.uni-dortmund.de id KAA17864; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:56:57 +0200 (MET DST) Original-Received: (from grossjoh@localhost) by lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) id KAA12562; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:56:57 +0200 Original-To: Karl Kleinpaste In-Reply-To: (Karl Kleinpaste's message of "Mon, 30 Jul 2001 21:50:29 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/21.0.105 Original-Lines: 22 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:37307 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:37307 On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Karl Kleinpaste wrote: > gnus-delay.el binds `C-c C-j' to gnus-delay-article. This works > fine for XEmacs as an X window. But when running XEmacs in an > xterm, XEmacs translates `C-j' to the XEmacs-internal symbol name > "linefeed." Maybe we should stick to the same keybinding style. Do you think that "\C-c\n" will work? > Related question: Why `C-c C-j' in the first place? I don't really > care, but I am curious what the mnemonic value of `C-j' was supposed > to be. `C-c C-j' is easy to type on a qwerty keyboard. It was free. It just kinda popped to my mind. Does anyone prefer a different keybinding? kai -- ~/.signature: No such file or directory