Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> > In what xterm did you test these? I remember vaguely that I tried in
> >> > the past to add more bindings to xterm.el, but abandoned the idea
> >> > after I discovered that different flavors of Unix had xterm's that
> >> > used incompatible bindings.
> >>
> >> Luckily, tho the bindings are sometimes different, they rarely conflict.
>
> > I'm not sure. I think, at the time, I did find conflicts.
>
> We can deal with them when we find them. As I said, those bindings are
> "weak" and overridden by anything, so they can't be much worse than no
> binding at all.
Actually, it seems that when I was testing this patch I had an
incomplete terminfo entry in ~/.terminfo that seems to be picked up by
default on GNU/Linux (without setting the TERMINFO environment
variable). This affects all the mappings involving the F1-12 keys.
(the strings are correct, but the keys don't work as expected).
It seems that any MODIFIER-F_KEY emits a string that is defined in one
terminfo entry kf13->kf63. So given that key definitions in xterm.el
don't have priority Emacs does not see them and it reports an
undefined key. For example for C-f5 it says "<f29> undefined".
I am not sure what is the best way to deal with these key bindings.
The rest of the bindings in the patch work.
--dan
_______________________________________________
Emacs-pretest-bug mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
