From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18582 invoked from network); 15 Dec 1999 17:31:03 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 15 Dec 1999 17:31:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 14594 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 1999 17:30:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 9062 Received: (qmail 14587 invoked from network); 15 Dec 1999 17:30:54 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <991215173050.ZM15230@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:30:50 +0000 In-Reply-To: <199912140913.KAA28947@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Comments: In reply to Sven Wischnowsky "Re: PATCH (and another bug report): Re: zsh script and SIGCONT" (Dec 14, 10:13am) References: <199912140913.KAA28947@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: PATCH (and another bug report): Re: zsh script and SIGCONT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Dec 14, 10:13am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote: } Subject: Re: PATCH (and another bug report): Re: zsh script and SIGCONT } } Bart Schaefer wrote: } } > So I was about to suggest that we should simply turn off MONITOR during } > `.' and `source' [...] } } [...] Somehow I think it should either suspend the `.' or the loop } (the top-level construct in the sourced file). The latter if we think } of the sourced file as an equivalent of command line input. If it's going to suspend anything, it should be the `.'. It's NOT equivalent to command-line input, because zsh doesn't deal with infinite typeahead. It's closest to executing a shell function, with no local parameter context. However, we certainly don't want startup rc-files to get backgrounded if one of them happens to do something that gives the user time to press ^Z. And I can see an argument for wanting to be able to suspend an individual command without interrupting startup processing entirely. And it definitely doesn't make any sense to background *that*. It's a tricky situation. The only useful criteria seems to me to be whether the user can reasonably expect to get back to a shell prompt when he presses ^Z. If the `.' command is going to violate that expectation, then at least the doc should say so somewhere. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com