From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12534 invoked from network); 5 Nov 1998 08:04:37 -0000 Received: from math.gatech.edu (list@130.207.146.50) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 5 Nov 1998 08:04:37 -0000 Received: (from list@localhost) by math.gatech.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA17432; Thu, 5 Nov 1998 02:59:00 -0500 (EST) Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 02:59:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 08:57:05 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <199811050757.IAA31104@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu In-reply-to: Peter Stephenson's message of Wed, 04 Nov 1998 17:35:01 +0100 Subject: Re: PATCH: completion or'ing and grouping Resent-Message-ID: <"x8T0T2.0.GG4.4hLGs"@math> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/4548 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu Peter Stephenson wrote: > > Excellent, everything seems to be working at the moment with the new > patches (though I expect you'll be hearing from me again...). > For some reason the mail system screwed up that last patch and I > get to get it from the archive. Strange. (Is there a way of > retrieving a patch as plain text, i.e. before HTMLifying? Otherwise > back-conversion is liable to screw up whitespace.) > Interesting, I got your message 4518 screwed up (in two parts). > One thing worried me a bit: this hunk from zle_tricky.c > > *** 4791,4796 **** > --- 4800,4808 ---- > int ics = cs, ocs, pl = 0, l, lp, ls; > char *ps; > Cline lc; > + > + if (!ainfo) > + return; > > fixsuffix(); > > didn't agree with what I had before, which came from the > patch-match.gz patch (natch). Namely, the fixsuffix() wasn't there in > what that patch introduced. I just added it by hand. > It's from the patch in message 4528. > Secondly, after I applied patch-match.gz, completion did nothing > whatsoever. After panicking I remembered compctl -T. But according > to my initialisation files, I never had a compctl -T before, and when > zsh started up, compctl -T -q was in effect (why?) If this is > intentional, hadn't that better now be compctl -T -q -tc? Otherwise > we're going to have a very large number of irate users. I don't understand this one. In my patched version the -T completion is correctly set to `compctl -T -tc' by default. Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de