From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: zsh-workers-request@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by coral.primenet.com.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA25420 for ; Sat, 9 Nov 1996 04:11:48 +1100 (EST) Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id MAA02762; Fri, 8 Nov 1996 12:08:01 -0500 (EST) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 12:08:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 8 Nov 96 17:05 MET From: hoh@approve.se (Goran Larsson) Subject: Re: modules configuration patch To: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu (Z Shell workers mailing list) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <8164.199611081323@stone.dcs.warwick.ac.uk> Resent-Message-ID: <"tnIwT.0.1h.mZsWo"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/2342 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu > The interface to modload could use some more thought. Is the argument > a filename, or a module name? At the moment only a pathname starting > with /, ./ or ../ is treated as a filename. It would be more consistent > to treat any pathname containing a / as an actual pathname, and only do > the path search and .so appending when only a bare name is specified. Please no. looking for xxx/yyy in the current directory just because it contains a / is horrible. The normal method for zsh to search for ordinary programs is to look in the PATH for xxx/yyy stuff, why not for modules as well? Makes it more consistent. This was added by PF after I requested it as it is perfect for managing the PATH namespace. It would be nice to have this for modules as well. -- Goran Larsson mailto:hoh@approve.se I was an atheist, http://home1.swipnet.se/%7Ew-12153/ until I found out I was God.