From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by melb.werple.net.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA06759 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 1996 23:40:57 +1000 (EST) Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id JAA10702; Mon, 22 Apr 1996 09:24:27 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 09:24:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 09:24:06 -0400 From: (Mike Kazda) Message-Id: <9604221324.AA21352@rumor.fishkill.ibm.com> To: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Cc: Peter Whaite Subject: Re: zsh-2.6-beta14 on AIX with login shell problem In-Reply-To: <199604220408.AAA17070@Kolmogorov.McRCIM.McGill.EDU> References: <9604220120.AA18880@rumor.fishkill.ibm.com> <199604220408.AAA17070@Kolmogorov.McRCIM.McGill.EDU> Resent-Message-ID: <"BAu7W1.0.8d2.AYuUn"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/941 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu >>>>> "Peter" == Peter Whaite writes: Peter> This might be because the TERM you are using is not Peter> installed in the terminfo data base. Actually the TERM (xterm in this case) is in the terminfo database in /usr/lib/terminfo. Peter> to specify my own terminfo database. Unfortunately this Peter> does not by itself tell zsh to go and take another look for Peter> the terminal type. You have to follow it with Peter> export TERM=$TERM Peter> Maybe someone can tell me of a neater way to get an Peter> alternative terminfo data base to take effect. I just tried a co-worker's terminfo database using TERMINFO in my ..profile BEFORE I exec the zsh beta process. All I set was the TERMINFO variable and did not have to export TERM=$TERM as you've indicated. Using his database, it works correctly. I can't really explain it, all he added was a few keypad and function key entries to the end of the xterm: knp=\E[6~, kpp=\E[5~, kf5=\E[15~, kf6=\E[17~, kf7=\E[18~, kf8=\E[19~, kf9=\E[20~, kf10=\E[21~, kf11=\E[23~, kf12=\E[24~, I don't see how this affects the difference I've seen on v2.5.03 and the v2.6-beta14. There must be some difference in the code that I'm seeing, but I'm not well versed in it to locate it. Mike