On Wed, 16.03.11 04:19, Jan Engelhardt (jeng...@medozas.de) wrote: > > On Wednesday 2011-03-16 03:58, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > >On Wed, 16.03.11 03:50, Jan Engelhardt (jeng...@medozas.de) wrote: > > > >Does this patch really make sense? C-u is in no way magic here, it works > >on every terminal. I am not sure why we should mention this here > >explicitly. > > There have been sufficiently enough console programs throughout my Linux > life that I have come to regard only certain control sequence as > reliable, and ^U is not amongst these. > > Midnight Commander rebinds ^U to swap panels, > gpg2/pinentry-ncurses takes ^U verbatim, > nano and editors of that family make ^U a paste rather than a kill, > (re)(al)pine and MUAs of that family inherit nano behavior. > > The reliable sequences I mentioned... just ^C, and surprisingly ^D. > And maybe ^S, because that always interferes when you least expect it :-)
Well, all these keycodes are actually handled by the kernel and in the terminal layer as part of ICANON (^U is VKILL to be precise). See tcsetattr(3) for more information. I'd argue that tools which redefine ^U and ^H and ^C to unrelated operations have made very poor choices, and they should probably be fixed. But that doesn't change the fact that the kernel default is to map ^U like we do, and I don't think we need to explicitly advertise that we follow the default behaviour of the kernel... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
