From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11012 invoked from network); 1 Sep 1999 15:55:09 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 1 Sep 1999 15:55:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 13022 invoked by alias); 1 Sep 1999 15:55:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 7614 Received: (qmail 13008 invoked from network); 1 Sep 1999 15:54:58 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <990901155452.ZM19380@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 15:54:52 +0000 In-Reply-To: <19990831201855.A25968@rom.oit.gatech.edu> Comments: In reply to Will Day "recexact in 3.1.6" (Aug 31, 8:18pm) References: <19990831201855.A25968@rom.oit.gatech.edu> <199909010955.LAA00151@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <199909010955.LAA00151@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Comments: In reply to Sven Wischnowsky "Re: recexact in 3.1.6" (Sep 1, 11:55am) X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: zsh workers mailing list Subject: Re: recexact in 3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Aug 31, 8:18pm, Will Day wrote: } Subject: recexact in 3.1.6 } } Option "recexact" doesn't seem to work quite right for me under 3.1.6, or } at least not as well as it did under 3.1.5: It's not supposed to work quite the same way that it did under 3.1.5; see zsh-workers/4132 and 4148. On Sep 1, 11:55am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote: } Subject: Re: recexact in 3.1.6 } } Since I don't use REC_EXACT, I have to ask for everyone's help here to } tell me if the behavior with the patch below is what you want/like/expect. It appears to be unchanged with respect to 4148, so I think this is fine. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com