[email protected] (Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas) wrote: |Steffen Nurpmeso <[email protected]> writes: |> Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <[email protected]> wrote: |>|here's an update to the latest release. |>|Test reports / comments / oks welcome.
|> Please note that any v14.8 including v14.8.2 has a really severe |> file locking bug and should not be used -- i will release v14.8.3 |> by the end of the week! | |I don't see a valid reason to push for an update until v14.8.3 is out. Ok. |(and I am not the maintainer of the port anyway) Yep. |> Btw… Since OpenBSD ships with -lreadline, how about using |> WANT_READLINE=yes instead of |> |>| WANT_EDITLINE=1 |> |> since it is so much more comfortable? | |I thought that readline and editline proposed more or less the same |features, why would one be more comfortable than the other? (Disclaimer: Oh, mostly tab-completion, and it is likely i haven't changed my .inputrc for many, many years and got used to it. I don't know, i'm not using this after implementing it: EL_PROMPT_ESC is still broken? Maybe editline(3) becomes interesting again when there is a new internal tab-completion function available that can be used for NCL (the builtin editor) and editline(3). Until then editline(3) cannot do that much, if anything more than the builtin NCL, but which is builtin and i guess faster. |apart from a few tests most of my uses of s-nail are non-interactive). Sure. v14.8 has a completely new MIME parameter handling that is now compliant (also to RFC 2231) and can thus also deal with filenames with spaces; your use cases should be safe in the future. |Anyway, since libreadline is under GPLv2+ (base system libreadline) or It's in the base system, right. Works out of the box. |GPLv3+ (ports libreadline) I don't think that would be a good move. | |> Otherwise the builtin |> command line editor may be worth looking at, but maybe without |> tabulator expansion (WANT_TABEXPAND=no) to not use wordexp(3). |> Yes, it is simple since it lets the terminal deal with the line |> (instead of implementing a visible viewpoint like e.g. ksh(1)), |> but i think doing so is still more comfortable than editline(3), |> especially regarding history handling. Just a suggestion. | |I'll leave that discussion to others. :) Of course. Keep on going. ._. Ciao, --steffen
