From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-27807-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 1154 invoked by alias); 18 Mar 2010 17:48:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 27807
Received: (qmail 7473 invoked from network); 18 Mar 2010 17:48:43 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.2.5
Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at ruderich.org designates 78.46.69.5 as permitted sender)
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 18:49:42 +0100
From: Simon Ruderich <simon@ruderich.org>
To: zsh-workers@zsh.org
Subject: Re: Update to _files in 27780 breaks chmod completion
Message-ID: <20100318174942.GA1373@ruderich.org>
References: <20100318163028.GA9043@ruderich.org>
 <201003181704.o2IH4Ixw016423@news01.csr.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=_zucker.schokokeks.org-24012-1268934515-0001-2"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <201003181704.o2IH4Ixw016423@news01.csr.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20-dev (2010-03-09)

--=_zucker.schokokeks.org-24012-1268934515-0001-2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 05:04:17PM +0000, Peter Stephenson wrote:
> If you read that message, you'll find that's exactly what *didn't* work
> for me before and *does* work now (as I just confirmed again).
>
> Are you sure you've got the latest executable as well as the latest
> functions?  The code changed in the patch for users/14905.

Ah, that's the problem. I'm using Zsh 4.3.6 with a current
checkout of the completion functions. Until now that always
worked perfectly.

Is there any chance this can still be supported or should I just
unapply the patch locally?

Thanks,
Simon
--=20
+ privacy is necessary
+ using gnupg http://gnupg.org
+ public key id: 0x92FEFDB7E44C32F9

--=_zucker.schokokeks.org-24012-1268934515-0001-2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
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=/Vgk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_zucker.schokokeks.org-24012-1268934515-0001-2--