From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14275 invoked by alias); 23 Nov 2011 20:28:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Users List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 16589 Received: (qmail 2921 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2011 20:28:41 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at spf.mandic.com.br designates 200.225.81.143 as permitted sender) Message-ID: <4ECD55E0.9050603@mandic.com.br> Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:21:52 -0200 From: "Daniel Serodio (lists)" User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.1 (Macintosh/20111102) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: zsh-users@zsh.org Subject: Re: Auto-correct and newly-added commands References: <4EC15E90.6020703@mandic.com.br> <111114201608.ZM11290@torch.brasslantern.com> <4EC65484.5040603@mandic.com.br> <111118070726.ZM20770@torch.brasslantern.com> In-Reply-To: <111118070726.ZM20770@torch.brasslantern.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bart Schaefer wrote: > On Nov 18, 10:50am, Daniel Serodio wrote: > } Subject: Re: Auto-correct and newly-added commands > } > } Bart Schaefer wrote: > }> On Nov 14, 4:31pm, Daniel Serodio (lists) wrote: > }> } > }> } It it possible to have zsh automatically run "rehash" after I reply no > }> } to an auto-correct prompt, so it "learns" this new command? > }> > }> That would certainly seem logical. Also it seems strange to load up > }> the command tables and check them for proper spellings when the word > }> that is being checked is not in the command position to begin with. > } Hmm, maybe my explanation wasn't clear (or I don't understand your > } reply), but I only have problem with real commands (in the beginning of > } the line), not with their arguments. Or did you mention "words not in > } the command position" from reviewing the code and not my explanation? > > The latter (that's the first hunk of the patch). > > }> What this patch does is reset the incremental path search in the event > }> the correction is rejected. That allows whatever hashing options the > }> user has specified to kick in at the time the path is searched during > }> command execution, rather than having to test them all here. > } This sounds like what I need, but when I tried to apply this patch, it > } failed (both on zsh 4.3.12 and on a fresh git clone). > > I'm not sure why it would have failed on 4.3.12, but it's already been > committed to sourceforge CVS so a fresh git of the very latest probably > won't need to have it applied. > > What was the failure message from patch? Did you use "patch -p0" ? I used patch -p0 on zsh-4.3.12 sources root directory: patching file Src/utils.c Hunk #1 FAILED at 2498. Hunk #2 FAILED at 2623. 2 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file Src/utils.c.rej > > } Where should I apply this patch? > > For your purposes you only need the second hunk with two lines added. > Try manually deleting the first hunk and then applying the second: I've applied this hunk by manually typing and it works like a charm. Thanks a lot, Daniel Serodio