On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 01:26:36 -0400 Richard Lowe wrote:
> Glenn Fowler wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 21:38:53 -0400 Richard Lowe wrote:
> >> Don Cragun wrote:
> >
> >> [heavy snipping]
> >
> >>> ksh93 itself does not set a default editing mode; it would be a
> >>> standards violation to do so. In an interactive shell, in-line editing
> >>> will be disabled, unless an in-line editing option is set by one of the
> >>> configuration files read when the shell is invoked, or is set
> >>> explicitly by the user.
> >
> >> Using the ksh93 tarball provided by the ksh93-integration project, this
> >> appears to not be true. Without the provided ksh.kshrc present, it
> >> defaults to vi-style editing.
> >
> > with all of the
> > { profile rc $ENV $EDITOR $HISTEDIT $VISUAL $FCEDIT }
> > files/env-vars flying around one must be wary of absolutes
> >
> > try
> > env - path-to-ksh93 --norc
> > set -o
> > and you should see all edit modes off
> >
> Ah ha!
> So in some cases I didn't quite manage to make it stop guessing, my
> apologies to all.
> So, we're left with the absolute come what may default being 'none',
> but in some cases a guess being made if there is no explicit
> configuration which the proposed setting in ksh.kshrc would override?
not so much guessing on ksh' part as doing what is prescribed
the default edit mode is set by checking, in order:
the value of $VISUAL if it ends in { vi emacs gmacs }
the value of $EDITOR if it ends in { vi emacs gmacs }
the last option or VISUAL/EDITOR settings in any of the
{ profile rc $ENV } startup files
-- Glenn Fowler -- AT&T Research, Florham Park NJ --
