From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21302 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2002 11:44:36 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 7 Mar 2002 11:44:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 12549 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2002 11:44:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 16777 Received: (qmail 12536 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2002 11:44:28 -0000 Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 11:43:28 +0000 From: Adam Spiers To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: zrecompile not verbose enough on failure? Message-ID: <20020307114328.B30741@corelli.new.ox.ac.uk> Reply-To: Adam Spiers Mail-Followup-To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk References: <20011021214251.A31530@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk> <1011022015957.ZM15484@candle.brasslantern.com> <15316.806.28762.457890@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <20020306144310.A21102@corelli.new.ox.ac.uk> <15495.9356.955445.827550@wischnow.berkom.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <15495.9356.955445.827550@wischnow.berkom.de>; from wischnow@berkom.de on Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 09:27:56AM +0100 X-URL: http://tigerpig.org/ X-OS: RedHat Linux Sender: "Adam Spiers,,07775562717,020 88 30 30 35" Sven Wischnowsky (wischnow@berkom.de) wrote: > So, here is my suggestion. Message printing gets a bit confused in > case of errors from zcompile, but personally, I don't care too much. It's good enough for me too. Thanks!