From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24427 invoked by alias); 13 May 2011 18:53:49 -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: 29264 Received: (qmail 23704 invoked from network); 13 May 2011 18:53:37 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) 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=3.3.1 Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at ntlworld.com designates 81.103.221.47 as permitted sender) Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 19:53:24 +0100 From: Peter Stephenson To: zsh workers Subject: Re: squeeze-slashes false not working? Message-ID: <20110513195324.6ab90eb2@pws-pc.ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20110513191710.657d2f61@pws-pc.ntlworld.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.22.0; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=JvdXmxIgLJv2/GthKqHpGJEEHukvLcvELVXUanXFreg= c=1 sm=0 a=CvNygPsZJl0A:10 a=uObrxnre4hsA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=NLZqzBF-AAAA:8 a=9PdMnIefvJYCHm9ICDMA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10 a=_dQi-Dcv4p4A:10 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117 On Fri, 13 May 2011 20:23:15 +0200 Mikael Magnusson wrote: > On 13 May 2011 20:17, Peter Stephenson wrote: > > On Thu, 12 May 2011 19:18:26 +0200 > > Mikael Magnusson wrote: > >> Another old mail: > >> """ > >> estragib noted on irc that > >> 21:28:58 completing ~/d/p/t/i. works for > >> ~/dev/prj/test/index.html, as does ~/d/*/*/ind. i vaguely remember > >> seeing a setting somewhere that will allow ~/d///ind but can't find > >> it again. help? :) > >> > >> and it seems that setting squeeze-slashes to true or false has no > >> effect, the slashes are always squeezed. But it works in zsh -f. > >> """ > >> > >> But now I can't reproduce it working in zsh -f. At best it jumps back > >> to the first doubleslash and completes at that point. Maybe another > >> option is interfering, any idea which one if so? > > > > That's the standard feature that it tries to expand path segments before > > the first. It can be turned off by setting the style path-completion to > > false, although what setting it to false does is to allow _path_files to > > skip a prefix of the file that already exists, and I'm not sure what > > happens if there are multiple slashes there. > > Hm, with that set, zsh -f starts acting like with my .zshrc, ie as if > I only had one slash. Does ls ///// just show stuff in / for you > too? The documentation for squeeze-slashes says it should act like I > typed ls /*/*/*/*/. Er, that sounds like it means it works with path-files *on*, and I don't know how that's supposed to be implemented. It also looks I don't know what's supposed to be happening in any given case, either, or quite what is or isn't working. -- Peter Stephenson Web page now at http://homepage.ntlworld.com/p.w.stephenson/