From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-9896-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@sunsite.auc.dk>
Received: (qmail 20176 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2000 09:47:30 -0000
Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30)
  by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 28 Feb 2000 09:47:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 24283 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2000 09:47:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Seq: 9896
Received: (qmail 24274 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2000 09:47:23 -0000
X-Envelope-Sender-Is: Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru (at relayer david.siemens.de)
From: "Andrej Borsenkow" <Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru>
To: "Sven Wischnowsky" <wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de>,
        <zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk>
Subject: RE: Questions/comments on completion code that arise from PWS's zsh guide
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 12:47:17 +0300
Message-ID: <000001bf81d0$cce58dc0$21c9ca95@mow.siemens.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="koi8-r"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <200002280936.KAA02281@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de>

>
> Maybe we should change _telnet, it's really broken for me because it
> doesn't even guess that my telnet supports -l. I think we should
> change the default specs to _arguments. Or are there any telnets
> without a -l option? Tanaka?
>

Yes, it is broken because it assumes too much about telnet :-) What is -l
anyway?

bor@itsrm2:~%> telnet -h
telnet: Illegal option -- h
Usage: telnet [-7][-8] host [port]

That is the common denominator you can expect (not sure even about -7/-8
options). Anything else should ideally :)) be either autodected or
user-settable.

That applies (sigh) to too many completion functions currently.

/andrej