From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12679 invoked from network); 5 Nov 1998 08:11:14 -0000 Received: from math.gatech.edu (list@130.207.146.50) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 5 Nov 1998 08:11:14 -0000 Received: (from list@localhost) by math.gatech.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id DAA17946; Thu, 5 Nov 1998 03:09:50 -0500 (EST) Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 03:09:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 09:07:56 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <199811050807.JAA23311@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: <"XPhwJ1.0.LO4.DrLGs"@math> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/4550 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu Peter Stephenson wrote: > > 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. > Did the mail system destroy (part of) the patch for compctl.c? There cc_first.mask2 is set to CC_CCCONT. Now CC_CCCONT is the same bit pattern as CC_REMOVE, so if you have cc_first.mask = CC_CCCONT in compctl.c then this should be changed to mask2. Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de