On 2013-05-20 00:42:41 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> OK. But as the initial contents are the same (really cloned), I don't
> think that there is much difference (mainly for existing references to
> this bug number).
I think there's another difference for users subscribed to this bug.
They are no
On 19 May 2013 23:42, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Control: clone -1 -2 -3
> Control: reassign -1 libreadline6
> Control: retitle -1 libreadline6: Something is wrong with binding keys to
> functions
> Control: found -1 6.2+dfsg-0.1
> Control: reassign -3 bash
> Control: retitle -3 bash (readline): So
Control: clone -1 -2 -3
Control: reassign -1 libreadline6
Control: retitle -1 libreadline6: Something is wrong with binding keys to
functions
Control: found -1 6.2+dfsg-0.1
Control: reassign -3 bash
Control: retitle -3 bash (readline): Something is wrong with binding keys to
functions
Control: fo
On 19 May 2013 22:18, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> found 363502 5.2+dfsg-2
> thanks
>
> On 2013-05-19 20:49:43 +0100, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> > libreadline5 seems to be used by few programs now, so it's not so
> > important. I think it's most important that it be filed against
> > libreadline6 and bas
found 363502 5.2+dfsg-2
thanks
On 2013-05-19 20:49:43 +0100, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> libreadline5 seems to be used by few programs now, so it's not so
> important. I think it's most important that it be filed against
> libreadline6 and bash. However, since it's likely to be the same bug in
> librea
On 19 May 2013 17:55, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2013-05-19 14:17:59 +0100, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> > This bug still exists, but I'm no longer sure to which package it should
> be
> > assigned. I come across the bug in bash 4.2, which doesn't seem to depend
> > on any version of libreadline now (
On 2013-05-19 14:17:59 +0100, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> This bug still exists, but I'm no longer sure to which package it should be
> assigned. I come across the bug in bash 4.2, which doesn't seem to depend
> on any version of libreadline now (e.g. bash 4.2-5).
It seems that bash now includes its ow
On 17 May 2006 22:43, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> On Wed, 17 May 2006, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> On 2006-04-19 15:11:20 +0100, Reuben Thomas wrote:
>>
>>> I can get some Ctrl-letter keys to work by doing things like:
>>>
>>> "\x1": kill-whole-line # binds C-a to kill-whole-line
>>>
>>> but \x15 does
On Wed, 17 May 2006, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2006-04-19 15:11:20 +0100, Reuben Thomas wrote:
I can get some Ctrl-letter keys to work by doing things like:
"\x1": kill-whole-line # binds C-a to kill-whole-line
but \x15 does not work as expected (trying various codes indicates
that most C-let
On 2006-04-19 15:11:20 +0100, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> I can get some Ctrl-letter keys to work by doing things like:
>
> "\x1": kill-whole-line # binds C-a to kill-whole-line
>
> but \x15 does not work as expected (trying various codes indicates
> that most C-letters can be bound in this way, but a
On 2006-04-19 15:11:20 +0100, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> "\C-u": kill-whole-line
>
> With readline 5.0 they work fine, but with 5.1 they don't work.
It doesn't work either here. I've tried with various locales
(ISO-8859-1 and UTF-8 ones) and various terminals.
--
Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Package: libreadline5
Version: 5.1-7
Severity: important
In my .inputrc I have the following lines:
"\M-n": history-search-forward
"\M-p": history-search-backward
"\C-u": kill-whole-line
With readline 5.0 they work fine, but with 5.1 they don't work.
Oddly, if I bind to macros, e.g.
"\C-u": "f
12 matches
Mail list logo
