From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6759 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2012 17:36:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 30548 Received: (qmail 24232 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2012 17:36:15 -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: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at closedmail.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) From: Bart Schaefer Message-id: <120629103553.ZM29217@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 10:35:53 -0700 In-reply-to: <20120629094045.GA96213@redoubt.spodhuis.org> Comments: In reply to Phil Pennock "4.3.17 unset RPS1 vs RPROMPT" (Jun 29, 2:40am) References: <20120629094045.GA96213@redoubt.spodhuis.org> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: 4.3.17 unset RPS1 vs RPROMPT MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Jun 29, 2:40am, Phil Pennock wrote: } } Is it expected that RPROMPT and RPS1 can be decoupled in this way? I suspect that's an unexpected side-effect from a change made quite some time ago to limit the "special"-ness of assorted variables, for compatibility with emulated shells for which those variables don't have a pre-existing definition. } Is there a correct way to clear the prompt, other than *always* having } to do "unset RPROMPT RPS1" because one or the other may have become } decoupled? Assign the empty string to either one of them instead? The way to fix this would be to create a new GSU structure that calls a set of function to link them, and change their IPDEF* declaration in Src/params.c to use that GSU, probably by moving them from IPDEF7 to IPDEF5 (now that IPDEF5 has been repaired to work correctly). (For those wondering, IPDEF6 was a single-use macro for PWD which was removed because PWD is no longer a special variable at all.)