On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 3:02 AM, Frank Fischer <[email protected]> wrote: > Am Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:53:10 -0600 > schrieb Leo Alekseyev <[email protected]>: > >> I was wondering if undo-tree is only there to match Vim behavior, and >> if I could use Evil without it. I actually find built-in Emacs undo >> functionality intuitive and I'm used to how it operates. On the other >> hand, I've run into some cases where undo-tree didn't behave as >> expected. If there are no ill consequences in using original Emacs >> undo vs undo-tree, it would be nice if it were configurable. > > Undo tree is completely optional, but if undo tree is available and > already loaded, the undo command "u" is mapped to the undo function of > the undo-tree package. If you install evil via el-get undo tree will be > loaded automatically. But you can get the old behavior by remapping "u" > do the standard undo function: > > (define-key evil-normal-state-map "u" 'undo)
Actually, that doesn't work, because undo-tree remaps the undo command, not just the undo keys. The solution seems to be simply to move undo-tree.el out of the way so that it doesn't load on (require 'undo-tree). _______________________________________________ implementations-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/implementations-list
