On 5/31/11 11:44 AM, David Thomas wrote:
> Oh, I wasn't asking you to do it, I was volunteering to. I just
> wanted to be sure there wasn't some overriding reason it was done the
> way it was, and that there wouldn't be too many people relying on the
> present behavior. As it is, I think I'll be
Oh, I wasn't asking you to do it, I was volunteering to. I just
wanted to be sure there wasn't some overriding reason it was done the
way it was, and that there wouldn't be too many people relying on the
present behavior. As it is, I think I'll be taking a swing at it once
my home internet is hoo
On 5/27/11 6:20 PM, David Thomas wrote:
> Hi Chet,
>
> Thank you for the response, and the attempt at assistance.
>
> I was unaware of the POSIX specifications relating to editing modes.
> After reading the specs, however, I don't think they conflict with
> what I propose. While the description
Hi Chet,
Thank you for the response, and the attempt at assistance.
I was unaware of the POSIX specifications relating to editing modes.
After reading the specs, however, I don't think they conflict with
what I propose. While the description of the [count]v command does
say that it executes the
On 5/23/11 1:05 PM, David Thomas wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In using bash over the years, I've been quite happy to be able to hit
> ctrl-x ctrl-e to pull up an editor when my input has grown too
> complicated.
>
> When using read -e for input, however, the behavior I find makes a lot
> less sense: the
