From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8414 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2005 12:29:22 -0000 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 4 Jul 2005 12:29:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 33657 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2005 12:29:15 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 4 Jul 2005 12:29:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 2845 invoked by alias); 4 Jul 2005 12:29:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 9018 Received: (qmail 2836 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2005 12:29:07 -0000 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by sunsite.dk with SMTP; 4 Jul 2005 12:29:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 32502 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2005 12:29:07 -0000 Received: from mxfep01.bredband.com (195.54.107.70) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 4 Jul 2005 12:29:03 -0000 Received: from puritan.pnetwork ([213.112.43.228] [213.112.43.228]) by mxfep01.bredband.com with ESMTP id <20050704122901.QMMP24612.mxfep01.bredband.com@puritan.pnetwork> for ; Mon, 4 Jul 2005 14:29:01 +0200 Received: by puritan.pnetwork (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A66DAADFEA; Mon, 4 Jul 2005 14:29:01 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 14:29:01 +0200 From: Nikolai Weibull To: zsh-users Subject: Re: reinventing print_exit_value Message-ID: <20050704122901.GC5546@puritan.pnetwork> Mail-Followup-To: zsh-users References: <200507032356.17308.cht@chello.at> <200507040104.41345.cht@chello.at> <20050703233511.GC5083@puritan.pnetwork> <200507040209.14406.cht@chello.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200507040209.14406.cht@chello.at> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 on a.mx.sunsite.dk X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=6.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Hits: -2.6 Christian Taylor wrote: > Yes, I could also achieve the desired output using a multi-lined > prompt, but I would still have to perform the same check using the > preexec-function that I mentioned in my original posting. (After just > hitting enter, the exit status is not reset, and so it would be > displayed a second time.) OK, I missed that, sorry. Still, how much of a problem is this? Perhaps you should just stop hitting a bunch of times after a non-zero exit status? ;-), nikolai -- Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/! Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden. main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}