For my login shell, I want a sh-compatible shell with the ability to
specify complex completions. As far as I can tell, ksh only supports
completions by command and filename. I want to do things like this,
in tcsh.
complete {folder,refile,scan,show,next,prev} \
'C@+*@`folders -fast -recurse
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 02:56:51PM +, Thomas Levine wrote:
> For my login shell, I want a sh-compatible shell with the ability to
> specify complex completions. As far as I can tell, ksh only supports
> completions by command and filename. I want to do things like this,
> in tcsh.
>
> comple
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Levine <_...@thomaslevine.com> wrote:
> Or I guess I could try zsh or bash
bash completion is very powerful as you can write shell functions to
generate the possible completions based on what is on the command line
so far. That being said you may lose yo
On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, Evan Gates wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 7:56 AM, Thomas Levine <_...@thomaslevine.com> wrote:
>> Or I guess I could try zsh or bash
>
> bash completion is very powerful as you can write shell functions to
> generate the possible completions based on what is on the comm
I just took surf to badssl.com to test how the TLS implementation in
surf reacts. To test I took the default Arch Linux package for a ride.
It failed the test. This is because by default:
static Bool strictssl = FALSE;
Without this set to TRUE, the browser effectively does not look at the
certific
That's in the config, the user should be responsible for it.
Raiz
On 2016-10-13 00:02, Alexander Keller wrote:
I just took surf to badssl.com to test how the TLS implementation in
surf reacts. To test I took the default Arch Linux package for a ride.
It failed the test. This is because by defau
