G.raud Meyer dixit: >First one should know what is the correct behaviour. The feature of […] >Before a patch fixing the strange case of a "successful but temporarily >stopped job has failed" it would be good to document the feature (and >the bug, if it is one).
I honestly don’t know. It is desirable to be able to change all sorts of terminal state with stty, so *some* not-resetting and/or saving is desirable. On the other hand, the editor needs a certain state, too. Basically, we need to not break the scenarios: $ stty something; some other command $ ← back to the line editor (fully) $ stty something $ some other command ← back to the line editor (partially? OTOH the line editor can cope with a LOT of states) We also want the line editor to work. It gets more complicated when backgrounded jobs come into play. As I said, I honestly have absolutely no idea… Comparing this with, say, the last pdksh release, would be a start: did it do the exact same thing, and, if not, why the differences. bye, //mirabilos -- Solange man keine schmutzigen Tricks macht, und ich meine *wirklich* schmutzige Tricks, wie bei einer doppelt verketteten Liste beide Pointer XORen und in nur einem Word speichern, funktioniert Boehm ganz hervorragend. -- Andreas Bogk über boehm-gc in d.a.s.r
